RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/commands (command.c vacuum.c) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/commands (command.c vacuum.c)
Date
Msg-id EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJOEBPDBAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/commands (command.c vacuum.c)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/commands (command.c vacuum.c)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> 
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> >> Special handling of TOAST relations during VACUUM. TOAST relations
> >> are vacuumed while the lock on the master table is still active.
> 
> > It seems very dangerous to me.
> > When VACUUM of a master table was finished, the transaction is
> > in already committed state in many cases. 
> 
> I don't see the problem.  If the toast table doesn't get vacuumed,
> no real harm is done other than failing to recover space.
> 

Hmm,is there any good reason to vacuum toast table in the 
transaction which was already internally committed by vacuum
of the master table ?  Is it possible under WAL ?

Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: mlw
Date:
Subject: Re: OK, does anyone have any better ideas?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: CRC