| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums |
| Date: | 2008-11-23 20:18:58 |
| Message-ID: | 1227471538.7370.14.camel@jdavis-laptop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2008-11-23 at 14:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> A possible problem is that if a relation is filled all in one shot,
> autovacuum would trigger a single vacuum cycle on it and then never have
> a reason to trigger another; leading to the bits never getting set (or
> at least not till an antiwraparound vacuum occurs). We might want to
> tweak autovac so that an extra vacuum cycle occurs in this case. But
> I'm not quite sure what a reasonable heuristic would be.
>
This would only be an issue if using the visibility map for things other
than partial vacuum (e.g. index-only scan), right? If we never do
another VACUUM, we don't need partial vacuum.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-11-23 20:50:09 | Re: Logging auto_explain outputs to another log file |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2008-11-23 20:09:12 | Re: Cool hack with recursive queries |