Re: allowing VACUUM to be cancelled for conflicting locks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Claudio Freire
Subject Re: allowing VACUUM to be cancelled for conflicting locks
Date
Msg-id CAGTBQpZP-+qz2ZMjWqarNSr541-53ywj_ORQB4BzSmqRTKgLrw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: allowing VACUUM to be cancelled for conflicting locks  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: allowing VACUUM to be cancelled for conflicting locks  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> > In the past, we've had situations where "everything is hung" turned out
>> > to be because of a script that ran manual VACUUM that was holding some
>> > lock. It's admittedly not a huge problem, but it might be useful if a
>> > manual VACUUM could be cancelled the way autovacuum can be.
>>
>> I think the real answer to that is "stop using manual VACUUM".
>
> As much as I'm a fan of autovacuum, that's not always possible.


Or even recommended, unless the docs changed radically in the last
couple of weeks.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Different behaviour of concate() and concate operator ||
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: allowing VACUUM to be cancelled for conflicting locks