| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture |
| Date: | 2013-05-30 19:08:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20130530190856.GG14029@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2013-05-30 11:48:12 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> There's currently some great ideas bouncing around about eliminating the
> overhead associated with FREEZE. However, I wanted to take a step back
> and take a look at the big picture for VACUUM, FREEZE and ANALYZE.
> Otherwise, we're liable to repeat the 8.4 problem of making one
> operation better (background vacuum) while making another one worse
> (freezing).
Inhowfar did 8.4 make freezing worse? I can't remember any new problems
there?
I agree that we need to be careful not to make things worse...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-05-30 19:10:01 | Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-05-30 19:03:29 | Re: Freezing without write I/O |