Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin
Date
Msg-id CAH2-WznYdRy5NOmLMYb+PVKCKTAs+Q0SOH6WSiGYOXJEx=MJKQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 11:49 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> Andres has suggested in the past that we allow maintenance_work_mem be
> >> set to a lower value or introduce some kind of development GUC so that
> >> we can more easily test multiple pass index vacuuming. Do you think
> >> this would be worth it?
>
> > No, I don't.
>
> I don't see why that's not a good idea.

I don't think that it's worth going to that trouble. Testing multiple
passes isn't hard -- not in any real practical sense.

I accept that there needs to be some solution to the problem of the
tests timing out on slow running buildfarm animals. Your
PG_TEST_SKIP_SLOW proposal seems like a good approach.

--
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin
Next
From: Corey Huinker
Date:
Subject: Re: Statistics Import and Export