Re: Hot standby and b-tree killed items

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Hot standby and b-tree killed items
Date: 2008-12-24 11:56:31
Message-ID: 1230119791.4793.1116.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 16:48 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Greg and Heikki have highlighted in this thread some aspects of btree
> > garbage collection that will increase the chance of queries being
> > cancelled in various circumstances
>
> Even HOT-prune may lead to frequent query cancellations and unlike
> VACUUM there is no way user can control the frequency of prune
> operations.

The patch does go to some trouble to handle that case, as I'm sure
you've seen. Are you saying that part of the patch is ineffective and
should be removed, or?

Should/could there be a way to control frequency of prune operations? We
could maintain cleanupxmin as a constant minimum distance from xmax, for
example.

Are we saying we should take further measures, as I asked upthread? If
it is a consensus that I take some action, then I will.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2008-12-24 12:26:02 Re: Hot standby and b-tree killed items
Previous Message KaiGai Kohei 2008-12-24 11:50:08 [idea] a copied relkind in pg_attribute