| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: optimizing CleanupTempFiles |
| Date: | 2008-09-18 12:00:44 |
| Message-ID: | 15778.1221739244@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ blink... ] Doesn't look like that should happen. What is your
>> test case?
> Hmph, must be because of the patch from last winter to prevent
> relfilenode reuse until next checkpoint.
Ah. I had misunderstood Alvaro to say that temp files (the kind under
discussion up to now) were not unlinked immediately; which would be
pretty strange given that fd.c is underneath md.c.
> Looks like we didn't make an
> exception for temporary tables. Although it's harmless, we could put an
> isTempOrToastNamespace() test in there:
Bad, bad idea to have md.c doing any catalog access. As already noted
downthread, it wouldn't buy much anyway.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-09-18 12:02:07 | Re: FSM patch - performance test |
| Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2008-09-18 11:54:02 | Re: New FSM patch |