Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavan Deolasee
Subject Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O
Date
Msg-id 2e78013d0701261044v306768b5tdd0fde8617203f74@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 1/26/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

I think what he's suggesting is deliberately not updating the hint bits
during a SELECT ...

No, I was suggesting doing it in bgwriter so that we may not need to that during
a SELECT. Of course, we need to investigate more and have numbers to prove
the need. Also you have already expressed concerns that doing so in bgwriter is deadlock
prone. So there is certainly more work needed for any such scheme to work.

Thanks,
Pavan

--

EnterpriseDB     http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Recursive query syntax ambiguity
Next
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: NULL value in subselect in UNION causes error