On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 06:26:37PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Wes <wespvp@syntegra.com> writes:
> > The problem was determined to be due to the fact that indexes are vacuumed
> > in index order, not in disk storage order. I don't see anything about this
> > in the "What's new" for 8.1. Has anything been done to resolve this?
>
> No. Avoiding that would require a new approach to
> vacuum-vs-ordinary-indexscan interlocking, so it won't happen until
> someone has a Bright Idea (tm).
Plus there is a TODO to only vacuum pages that are known to have dead
tuples, which should hopefully mean no more index-scans during vacuum as
well. Hopefully this makes it into 8.2...
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
