Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each
Date
Msg-id 4788.1120407589@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net>)
Responses Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each
List pgsql-patches
Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net> writes:
> Ok, this is a new version of the vacuum patch with the following changes
> following some suggestions in this thread.

The more I look at this, the uglier it looks ... and I still haven't
seen any convincing demonstration that it *works*, ie doesn't have
bad side-effects on the transaction-is-in-progress logic.  I'm
particularly concerned about what happens to the RecentXmin horizon
for pg_subtrans and pg_multixact operations.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Roles - SET ROLE Updated