From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |
Date: | 2022-02-15 14:16:06 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaQ3U0nUCGjkgN314kgRo3hWv6s=r8DzojTMF+_HS4q0A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 1:04 AM John Naylor
<john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Well, the point of inventing this new vacuum mode was because I
> thought that upon reaching xidStopLimit, we couldn't issue commands,
> period, under the postmaster. If it was easier to get a test instance
> to xidStopLimit, I certainly would have discovered this sooner. When
> Andres wondered about getting away from single user mode, I assumed
> that would involve getting into areas too deep to tackle for v15. As
> Robert pointed out, lazy_truncate_heap is the only thing that can't
> happen for vacuum at this point, and fully explains why in versions <
> 14 our client's attempts to vacuum resulted in error. Since the
> failsafe mode turns off truncation, vacuum should now *just work* near
> wraparound. If there is any doubt, we can tighten the check for
> entering failsafe.
+1 to all of that.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-02-15 14:34:32 | Re: bailing out in tap tests nearly always a bad idea |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2022-02-15 14:10:25 | Re: Observability in Postgres |