Re: Metadata about relation creation & full scans.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Metadata about relation creation & full scans.
Date: 2017-03-22 14:54:07
Message-ID: 31677.1490194447@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-03-22 10:14:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (2) How you gonna update this in vacuum? It cannot do a transactional
>> update.

> I think we can just do that in a separate transaction, at the tail end
> of vacuum_rel() - if we crash just before that, not that much is lost.

Blech. What if someone's queued an exclusive lock request on the table?

Actually though, maybe you could get away with updating the last-vacuum
field nontransactionally. I think we're already updating some of the
other pg_class fields nontransactionally.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2017-03-22 14:55:27 Re: Hash support for grouping sets
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-03-22 14:52:40 Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4