> > > -- start the VACUUM from the first non-filled block
> > >
> > > So if we do this, we wouldn't need to worry about HOT tuples at
> > > nor would we need to wait until all transactions are gone.
> > You need to wait until you are allowed to truncate if you want
> > concurrency.
> > Or a concurrent scan might miss a row, because the visible tuple got
> > truncated away.
> I was not suggesting that we remove visible rows through truncation.
Sure, unless you suggest to not truncate during this vacuum run ?
But we are talking about vacuum full, so truncation is essential.
It was suggested to do a dummy null update to move live tuples up front.
The old version is still visible for serializable txns.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-03-01 14:06:41|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?|
|Previous:||From: Pavan Deolasee||Date: 2007-03-01 14:00:52|
|Subject: HOT WIP Patch - version 4.0|