Ron Mayer wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Peter Schuller wrote:
>>> to have a slow background process (similar to normal non-full vacuums
>> ...
>> I think it's doable, if you take a copy of the tuple, and set the ctid
>> pointer on the old one like an UPDATE, and wait until the old tuple is
>> no longer visible to anyone before removing it. It does require some
>> changes to tuple visibility code.
>
> Wouldn't just having this slow background process
> repeatedly alternating between
> update table set anycol=anycol where ctid > [some ctid near the end]
> and running normal VACUUM statements do what the original poster
> was asking?
Almost. Updaters would block waiting for the UPDATE, and updaters in
serializable mode would throw serialization errors. And the "WHERE ctid
> ?" would actually result in a seq scan scanning the whole table, since
our tid scans don't support inequality searches.
> And with 8.3, I guess also avoiding HOT?
HOT shouldn't cause any complications here AFAICS.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
