Re: pgsql: Allow vacuums to report oldestxmin

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Allow vacuums to report oldestxmin
Date: 2017-03-25 16:37:21
Message-ID: CAHGQGwHWWT6N-65DZijHHjCUbxEPDyUP7L5x0ZT6b3=d4d7V7w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Allow vacuums to report oldestxmin
>>
>> Allow VACUUM and Autovacuum to report the oldestxmin value they
>> used while cleaning tables, helping to make better sense out of
>> the other statistics we report in various cases.
>>
>> Branch
>> ------
>> master
>>
>> Details
>> -------
>> http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/9eb344faf54a849898d9be012ddfa8204cfeb57c
>>
>> Modified Files
>> --------------
>> src/backend/commands/vacuumlazy.c | 9 +++++----
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>
> Should we change the example in vacuum.sgml file as well? Attached patch.

"tuples" in the above should be "row versions"?
We should review not only this line but also all the lines in the example
of VERBOSE output, I think.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2017-03-25 17:26:20 Re: pgsql: Allow vacuums to report oldestxmin
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2017-03-25 16:24:09 Re: pgsql: Add COMMENT and SECURITY LABEL support for publications and subs

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-03-25 16:50:48 Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-03-25 16:35:35 Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?