From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums |
Date: | 2009-01-15 15:48:53 |
Message-ID: | 200901151548.n0FFmr204820@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> Also, is anything being done about the concern about 'vacuum storm'
> >> explained below?
> >
> > I'm interested too.
>
> The additional "vacuum_freeze_table_age" (as I'm now calling it) setting
> I discussed in a later thread should alleviate that somewhat. When a
> table is autovacuumed, the whole table is scanned to freeze tuples if
> it's older than vacuum_freeze_table_age, and relfrozenxid is advanced.
> When different tables reach the autovacuum threshold at different times,
> they will also have their relfrozenxids set to different values. And in
> fact no anti-wraparound vacuum is needed.
>
> That doesn't help with read-only or insert-only tables, but that's not a
> new problem.
OK, is this targeted for 8.4?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-01-15 15:51:35 | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-15 15:36:29 | Re: tuplestore potential performance problem |