| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUMs and WAL |
| Date: | 2008-10-28 10:10:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1225188645.3971.118.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 11:45 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 08:49 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Looking at a VACUUM's WAL records makes me think twice about the way we
> > issue a VACUUM.
> >
> > 1. First we scan the heap, issuing a HEAP2 clean record for every block
> > that needs cleaning.
>
> IIRC the first heap pass just collects info and does nothing else.
> Is this just an empty/do-nothing WAL record ?
8.3 changed that; it used to work that way. I guess I never looked at
the amount of WAL being generated.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-10-28 10:23:34 | Re: WIP patch: convert SQL-language functions to return tuplestores |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2008-10-28 09:45:30 | Re: VACUUMs and WAL |