Re: autovacuum locking question - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: autovacuum locking question
Date
Msg-id 16067.1575652339@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: autovacuum locking question  (Mike Schanne <mschanne@kns.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Mike Schanne <mschanne@kns.com> writes:
> Is this what you are referring to?
> - Prevent VACUUM from trying to freeze an old multixact ID involving a still-running transaction (Nathan Bossart,
JeremySchneider) 
> This case would lead to VACUUM failing until the old transaction terminates.
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/release/9.6.16/

Hmmm ... after digging through the commit log, it seems the improvements
I was thinking of were all pre-9.6.  The only post-9.6 vacuum truncation
performance fix I can find is

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=7e26e02ee

which came in in v10.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Mike Schanne
Date:
Subject: RE: autovacuum locking question
Next
From: Mike Schanne
Date:
Subject: unexpected result for wastedbytes query after vacuum full