Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)
Date
Msg-id 20080627165210.GH28169@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > Could autovacuum emit log messages as soon as it sees such tables and start
> > dropping them at some point later?
> 
> We might have to rearrange the logic a bit to make that happen (I'm not
> sure what order things get tested in), but a log message does seem like
> a good idea.  I'd go for logging anytime an orphaned table is seen,
> and dropping once it's past the anti-wraparound horizon.

I don't think this requires much of a rearrangement -- see autovacuum.c
1921ff.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Does anything dump per-database config settings? (was Re: ALTER DATABASE vs pg_dump)
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)