| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot standby and b-tree killed items |
| Date: | 2008-12-21 23:40:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20081221234031.GA8720@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> Gregory Stark wrote:
>>>> A vacuum being replayed -- even in a different database -- could trigger the
>>>> error. Or with the btree split issue, a data load -- again even in a different
>>>> database -- would be quite likely cause your SELECT to be killed.
>>> Hmm, I wonder if we should/could track the "latestRemovedXid"
>>> separately for each database. There's no reason why we need to kill
>>> a read-only query in database X when a table in database Y is
>>> vacuumed.
>>
>> What about shared catalogs?
>
> True, vacuums on shared catalogs would affect read-only queries on all
> databases.
Maybe it's possible to track latestRemovedXid for each database, and
additionally another counter that tracks vacuums on shared catalogs.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Emmanuel Cecchet | 2008-12-21 23:54:52 | Re: Sync Rep: Second thoughts |
| Previous Message | Markus Wanner | 2008-12-21 23:35:51 | Re: Sync Rep: Second thoughts |