Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate
Date
Msg-id 200204180400.g3I40MH05937@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thread added to TODO.detail/drop.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Actually, what we need to do to reclaim space is to enable table
> > recreation without the column, now that we have relfilenode for file
> > renaming.  It isn't hard to do, but no one has focused on it.  I want to
> > focus on it, but have not had the time, obviously, and would be very
> > excited to assist someone else.
> >
> > Hiroshi's fine idea of marking certain columns as unused would not have
> > reclaimed the missing space, just as my idea of physical/logical column
> > distinction would not reclaim the space either.  Again, my
> > physical/logical idea is more for fixing other problems and
> > optimization, not DROP COLUMN.
> 
> Hmmm.  Personally, I think that a DROP COLUMN that cannot reclaim space is
> kinda useless - you may as well just use a view!!!
> 
> So how would this occur?:
> 
> 1. Lock target table for writing (allow reads)
> 2. Begin a table scan on target table, writing
>    a new file with a particular filenode
> 3. Delete the attribute row from pg_attribute
> 4. Point the table in the catalog to the new filenode
> 5. Release locks
> 6. Commit transaction
> 7. Delete orhpan filenode
> 
> i. Upon postmaster startup, remove any orphaned filenodes
> 
> The real problem here is the fact that there are now missing attnos in
> pg_attribute.  Either that's handled or we renumber the attnos - which is
> also quite hard?
> 
> This, of course, suffers from the double size data problem - but I believe
> that it does not matter - we just need to document it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, Oracle support
> 
> ALTER TABLE foo SET UNUSED col;
> 
> Which invalidates the attribute entry, and:
> 
> ALTER TABLE foo DROP col CHECKPOINT 1000;
> 
> Which actually reclaims the space.  The optional CHECKPOINT [n] clause
> tells Oracle to do a checkpoint every [n] rows.
> 
> "Checkpointing cuts down the amount of undo logs accumulated during the
> drop column operation to avoid running out of rollback segment space.
> However, if this statement is interrupted after a checkpoint has been
> applied, the table remains in an unusable state. While the table is
> unusable, the only operations allowed on it are DROP TABLE, TRUNCATE
> TABLE, and ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMNS CONTINUE (described below). "
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Inefficient handling of LO-restore + Patch