Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYgXJARyXBBfc85dfKxdeTMLA5+wYQomvqBgZruerJ6_g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Not sure about the log line, but allowing pgstattuple to distinguish
>> between recently-dead and quite-thoroughly-dead seems useful.
>
> The dividing line is enormously unstable though.  pgstattuple's idea of
> RecentGlobalXmin could even be significantly different from that of a
> concurrently running VACUUM.  I can see the point of having VACUUM log
> what it did, but opinions from the peanut gallery aren't worth much.

Hmm, you have a point.

But as Yeb points out, it seems like we should at least try to be more
consistent about the terminology.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yeb Havinga
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring