Last chance to object to MVCC-safe CLUSTER

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Last chance to object to MVCC-safe CLUSTER
Date: 2007-04-07 16:09:58
Message-ID: 9617.1175962198@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Awhile back Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> wrote:
> Making cluster MVCC-safe will kill my back-door of clustering a hot
> table while I run a full DB backup.

Are we agreed that the TRUNCATE-based workaround shown here
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00606.php
is an adequate response to this objection?

(This assumes of course that TRUNCATE will never become MVCC-safe,
but I think that's a reasonable thing to assume. I notice we don't
document TRUNCATE as unsafe ... will go fix that.)

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Fuhr 2007-04-07 16:10:08 Re: Fate of pgsnmpd
Previous Message Stuart Bishop 2007-04-07 14:31:02 Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory