Re: autovacuum and orphaned large objects

From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovacuum and orphaned large objects
Date: 2011-10-24 15:29:52
Message-ID: 4EA58470.8020204@timbira.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 24-10-2011 11:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> Euler Taveira de Oliveira<euler(at)timbira(dot)com> writes:
>> The main point of autovacuum is maintenance tasks. Currently, it executes
>> VACUUM and ANALYZE commands. I want to propose that we incorporate vacuumlo
>> functionality into it.
>
> I'm not terribly thrilled with that because (a) large objects seem like
> mostly a legacy feature from here, and
>
Right, but there isn't a solution for > 1 GB column data besides LO.

> (b) it's hard to see how to
> implement it without imposing overhead on everybody, whether they use
> LOs or not. This is especially problematic if you're proposing that
> cleanup triggers not be required.
>
I was thinking about starting the LO cleanup after autovacuum finishes the
VACUUM command (so no trigger, no new mechanism). And about the overhead
imposed, it will only execute the cleanup code in the tables that have oid/lo
columns (this information will be collected when the autovacuum collects table
information).

--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira - Timbira http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2011-10-24 15:33:40 Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-10-24 15:28:35 Re: autovacuum and orphaned large objects