Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: dave(at)turbocat(dot)de, ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Date: 1999-01-07 03:08:40
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.05.9901062307560.417-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > Start at the top of the table, go to the first 'blank' section (a deleted
> > record)...find the next good record that will fit in the space, move it
> > there...clear out the old space, etc...
> >
> > if dba issues a 'vacuum', lock the table and do all records at once, but
> > otherwise try and vacuum the table live...
> >
> > With the new MVCC serialization, this concept should be less intrusive on
> > readers, no?
>
> Wish I knew the answer. I can guess, but that isn't going to help.

Guess == throwing in ideas, even if they are incorrect...the way I
figure it, I through out alot of guesses...some of them spark ideas in
others and we see some really neat ideas come out of it :)

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-01-07 03:53:51 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-01-07 02:50:04 Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-01-07 03:53:51 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-01-07 02:36:31 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long