| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher |
| Date: | 2007-10-01 21:33:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1191274422.4260.92.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 16:50 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Can CREATE INDEX and ANALYZE be made to run concurrently?
>
> I don't see why not (except for the fact that both try to update
> reltuples and relpages AFAIR, so we would need to be careful about
> that).
This seems like the most desirable solution, everything else I've
thought of is really just a kluge.
We could make ANALYZE use optimistic locking, so it doesn't attempt the
catalog lock until later, so ANALYZE would be two internal transactions.
It should not overwrite the reltuples values from a concurrent CREATE
INDEX either.
We should not allow VACUUM to be concurrent with either CREATE INDEX or
ANALYZE, but then thats not the problem here anyway.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-01 22:53:40 | Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-10-01 21:33:37 | Re: pgsql: Use BIO functions to avoid passing FILE * pointers to OpenSSL |