Re: Reviewing freeze map code

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code
Date: 2016-06-06 15:45:02
Message-ID: 22317.1465227902@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> Except that we right now don't have any realistic way to figure out
>> whether this new feature actually does the right thing.

> I just don't see how running VACUUM on the all-frozen pages is going
> to help.

Yes. I don't see that any of the proposed features would be very useful
for answering the question "is my VM incorrect". Maybe they would fix
problems, and maybe not, but in any case you couldn't rely on VACUUM
to tell you about a problem. (Even if you've got warning messages in
there, they might disappear into the postmaster log during an
auto-vacuum. Warning messages in VACUUM are not a good debugging
technology.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message 'Bruce Momjian *EXTERN*' 2016-06-06 15:45:13 Re: Prepared statements and generic plans
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-06-06 15:44:56 Re: Reviewing freeze map code