Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL
Date
Msg-id 1265039882.13782.12413.camel@ebony
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 10:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 10:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> the assumption that the file is less than one disk block,
> >> it should be just as atomic as pg_control updates are.
> 
> > IIRC there were 173 relations affected by this. 4 bytes each we would
> > have more than 512 bytes.
> 
> Where in the world did you get that number?
> 
> There are currently 29 shared relations (counting indexes), and 13
> nailed local relations, which would go into a different map file.
> I'm not sure if the set of local catalogs requiring the map treatment
> is exactly the same as what's presently nailed, but that's probably
> a good approximation.

I was suggesting that we only do shared and nailed relations. Sounds
like you agree.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib\xml2 package's xpath_table function in PostgreSQL
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and deadlock detection