| From: | Scott Ray <scott(at)scottray(dot)io> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at, japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com, qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com, samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Report oldest xmin source when autovacuum cannot remove tuples |
| Date: | 2026-06-06 18:40:31 |
| Message-ID: | GhIqK8CfmeX-u9drRyP0V0gBMYk0SO6dMHYW-woGxASgasMOG6nK_K6tMCYqIc_jkelCvF1RRScvQ7UHkDzSeJgIxKOY2CO1lJBJLulrbzg=@scottray.io |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Shinya said [1] that we could have a view in the future. We could
> > have both the logging and the view call a single function that reads
> > the procArray and other sources to gather the horizon information. I
> > think the logging and the view would complement each other.
> >
> > Should I start another thread?
>
> My mild preference would be to keep the discussion on this thread,
> since the shared function design is central to both the log and the
> view and may be easier to keep aligned in one place. That said, I'm
> not strongly attached to that, so please pick whichever feels more
> convenient.
I attached a patch that uses a helper function that could also be used
for a view, but I don't think it's necessary immediately, because
refactoring later wouldn't be difficult.
--
Scott Ray
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Refactor-GetXidHorizonBlockers-around-a-new-GetXidHo.patch | application/octet-stream | 8.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Ray | 2026-06-06 20:10:10 | Re: [PATCH] Don't call ereport(ERROR) from recovery target GUC assign hooks |
| Previous Message | Alexander Nestorov | 2026-06-06 17:37:51 | Re: [PATCH] btree_gist: add cross-type integer operator support for GiST |