Re: CLUSTER and MVCC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: CLUSTER and MVCC
Date
Msg-id 420.1173458189@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CLUSTER and MVCC  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: CLUSTER and MVCC  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: CLUSTER and MVCC  ("Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>)
Re: CLUSTER and MVCC  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> We wouldn't clean up tuples that are visible to a transaction, but if 
> you have one long-running transaction like pg_dump in a database with 
> otherwise short transaction, you'll have a lot of tuples that are not 
> vacuumable because of the long-running process, but are not in fact 
> visible to any transaction.

It sounds to me like you are proposing to remove the middles of update
chains, which would break READ-COMMITTED updates initiated by the older
transactions.  Now admittedly pg_dump isn't going to issue any such
updates, but VACUUM doesn't know that.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: Interaction of PITR backups and Bulk operationsavoiding WAL
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and MVCC