Re: New VACUUM FULL

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New VACUUM FULL
Date: 2009-12-21 12:56:41
Message-ID: 4B2F7089.6090703@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:
> I notice that during copy_heap_data() we make no attempt to skip pages
> that are all visible according to the visibilitymap. It seems like it
> would be a substantial win to copy whole blocks if all the
> pre-conditions are met (I see what they are). I'm surprised to see that
> neither CLUSTER nor VACUUM FULL made use of this previously. I think we
> either need to implement that or document that vacuum will not skip
> all-visible pages when running VACUUM FULL.

Unfortunately the visibility map isn't completely crash-safe at the
moment (see comments in visibilitymap.c for details). So it's not safe
to use it for such purposes. I was planning to address that in 8.5 but
it seems I won't have the time.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martin Pihlak 2009-12-21 12:59:30 Re: fdw validation function vs zero catalog id
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2009-12-21 12:56:13 Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O