Re: Allow "snapshot too old" error, to prevent bloat

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Allow "snapshot too old" error, to prevent bloat
Date: 2015-02-20 02:58:34
Message-ID: 54E6A2DA.4040503@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/19/15 1:54 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Would pg_dump be able to opt-out of such a restriction?
>
> I don't see how, since vacuum would be removing recently dead
> tuples that are still visible; the alternative to getting a
> "snapshot too old" error when reading a page which could be
> affected is to return incorrect results, and nobody wants that.
> The best you could do if you wanted to run pg_dump (or similar) and
> it might take more time than your old_snapshot_threshold would be
> to increase the threshold, reload, dump, set it back to the
> "normal" setting, and reload again.

While I think pg_dump is a great solution for small to medium
installations, there are a number of excellent file-based backup options
available. Anyone who is seriously worried about bloat (or locking)
should be looking to those solutions.

--
- David Steele
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-02-20 03:01:12 Re: Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL
Previous Message Matt Kelly 2015-02-20 02:56:19 Re: Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL