| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c |
| Date: | 2015-03-11 19:09:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20150311190950.GP3291@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > - 0001 is the previous one
> > - 0002 removes VacuumStmt from the call stack of ANALYZE and VACUUM routines
> > - 0003 moves for_wraparound in VacuumParams.
>
> Yeah, I think something like this could be a sensible approach.
But autovacuum is still manufacturing a VacuumStmt by hand. If we want
to get rid of that, I think it'd work to have a new
ExecVacuum(VacuumStmt, params) function which is called from
standard_ProcessUtility and does just vacuum(rel, relid, params).
Autovacuum on the other hand can call vacuum() without having to
construct the parse node.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-03-11 19:14:59 | Re: Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-03-11 18:44:47 | Re: Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c |