Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum?

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, 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: 2022-01-21 05:58:46
Message-ID: CAD21AoBXPxmCowqauR4DLU8zVNrbngewbQOQuXqJF89chQa=Zg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 4:14 AM John Naylor
<john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 12:46 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 7:04 AM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I guess I'm ultimately imagining the new options as replacing the
> > > vacuumdb implementation. IOW vacuumdb would just use MIN_(M)XID_AGE
> > > behind the scenes (as would a new top-level command).
> >
> > I had the same idea.
>
> This seems to be the motivating reason for wanting new configurability
> on the server side. In any case, new knobs are out of scope for this
> thread. If the use case is compelling enough, may I suggest starting a
> new thread?

The purpose of this thread is to provide a way for users to run vacuum
only very old tables (while skipping index cleanup, etc.), and the way
is not limited to introducing a new top-level VACUUM statement yet,
right? A new top-level VACUUM statement you proposed seems a good idea
but trying to achieve it by extending the current VACUUM statement is
also a good idea. So I think the ideas like MIN_XID_AGE option and new
table selector in VACUUM statement are relevant to this thread.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com 2022-01-21 06:08:03 RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure
Previous Message Greg Nancarrow 2022-01-21 05:50:40 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side