Re: vacuum vs open transactions - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: vacuum vs open transactions
Date
Msg-id 1105553458.24795.7.camel@state.g2switchworks.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to vacuum vs open transactions  ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>)
Responses Re: vacuum vs open transactions  ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>)
List pgsql-general
On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 11:59, Ed L. wrote:
> I'm looking at some 7.3.4 vacuum output, and at first glance it does not
> appear that vacuum is reclaiming any dead tuple space if there is even a
> single open transaction, even if the open transaction does not in any way
> reference the table being vacuumed.  Is that correct?  Is the behavior
> different in later versions?

I believe the problem is occurring if the open transaction is older than
the tuples that could be vacuumed.  The MVCC system means that as long
as a transaction that started X hours ago is still open, the tuples that
have been freed since then can't vacuumed because they need to stay
visible for that transaction.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tony Caduto
Date:
Subject: Postgresql 8.0 and Cancel/Kill backend functions
Next
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql 8.0 and Cancel/Kill backend functions