Re: Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobUbzYu9kmEzhYsBU--LaKkA1M32YEF4Yv2UzFsnzPZNg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> It did not use to blow this question off: back around 8.3 you got
> DELETE_IN_PROGRESS if the tuple had a delete pending.  I think we need
> less laziness + fuzzy thinking here.  Maybe we should have a separate
> HEAPTUPLE_INSERT_AND_DELETE_IN_PROGRESS result code?  Is it *really*
> the case that callers other than VACUUM itself are okay with failing
> to make this distinction?

I think that would be a good idea for conceptual clarity if nothing
else.  If callers are OK with it, then they can treat both of those
codes alike; but then at least there's clear evidence as to the
author's intent.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing NOT IN to use ANTI joins
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Supporting Windows SChannel as OpenSSL replacement