| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Idea for getting rid of VACUUM FREEZE on cold pages |
| Date: | 2010-06-08 01:26:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20100608012614.GH21875@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> If we were actually going in this direction we'd
> want to write a much better WAL-text-dump tool than we have, and then
> in principle somebody could sanitize the text output before shipping
> it off. But going through a large volume of data that way could be
> pretty impractical. Also, we (or at least I) have nearly zip experience
> with trying to debug problems by examining WAL, so it's not real clear
> to me which details might be important.
Just an off-the-wall thought, but, would it be possible to have a tool
which read WAL backwards and compared entries in the WAL against entries
on disk? I realize that you'd only see one version of a particular
block and then have to skip any updates which are earlier than it, but
it seems like you could cover a pretty large chunk of the recent changes
to the database using this approach..
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2010-06-08 01:38:23 | Re: Functional dependencies and GROUP BY |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2010-06-08 01:17:32 | Re: [PATCH] Fix leaky VIEWs for RLS |