Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM
Date
Msg-id 877it3leb3.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM
List pgsql-patches
I have a question about what would happen for a transaction running a command
like COPY FROM. Is it possible it would manage to arrange to have no live
snapshots at all? So it would have no impact on concurrent VACUUMs? What about
something running a large pg_restore?

"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> On the whole though I think we should let this idea go till 8.4;

I tend to agree but for a different reason. I think it's something that will
open the doors for a lot of new ideas. If we put it in CVS HEAD early in 8.4 I
think (or hope at any rate) we'll think of at least a few new things we can do
with the new more precise information it exposes.

Just as an example, if you find you have no live snapshots can you throw out
the combocid hash? Any tuple you find with a combocid that's been discarded
that way must predate your current scan and therefore is deleted for you.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Improvement of procArray.xmin for VACUUM