From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: TODO updates |
Date: | 1999-11-23 02:51:42 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.10.9911222250470.14653-100000@thelab.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > one of the things I remember seeing discussed, and wonder about current
> > status on:
> > removal of the whole pg_vlock requirement on vacuum?
>
> I have that on my to-do list; as far as I know it's a trivial code
> change, but I just haven't gotten to it. Maybe I'll try it tonight.
is this something that could safely be back-patched into v6.5.x's tree?
have at least one project that could really use the ability to vacuum a
database without the tables being locked :)
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 1999-11-23 03:20:57 | RE: [HACKERS] 7.0 status request |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-11-23 02:51:12 | Mandrake RPMs (was RPM build on Suse linux 6.2) |