Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher
Date: 2007-10-01 20:40:21
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> This is an interesting idea, but I think it's attacking the wrong
>> problem.  To me, the problem here is that an ANALYZE should not block
>> CREATE INDEX or certain forms of ALTER TABLE.
> I doubt that that will work; in particular I'm pretty dubious that you
> can safely make CREATE INDEX and VACUUM run together.  Since they'd be
> unlikely to be using the identical OldestXmin horizon, you'd likely end
> up with dangling index entries (ie, CREATE INDEX indexes a tuple that
> the VACUUM removes shortly afterward).

I think the main issue is ANALYZE not VACUUM (at least in this thread) 
since it's DB load times that are in question.  Can CREATE INDEX and 
ANALYZE be made to run concurrently?

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-10-01 20:50:07
Subject: Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-10-01 20:30:06
Subject: pgsql: Use BIO functions to avoid passing FILE * pointers to OpenSSL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group