| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GetOldestXmin going backwards is dangerous after all |
| Date: | 2013-02-02 18:34:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJmCNATx3J=MFfdBsrH8FMqMms7E6JpWJcDLthGoNiVVw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2 February 2013 00:24, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> * The return value is also adjusted with vacuum_defer_cleanup_age, so
> * increasing that setting on the fly is another easy way to make
> * GetOldestXmin() move backwards, with no consequences for data integrity.
>
> And as for that, it's been pretty clear for awhile that allowing
> vacuum_defer_cleanup_age to change on the fly was a bad idea we'd
> eventually have to undo. The day of reckoning has arrived: it needs
> to be PGC_POSTMASTER.
Agreed, will fix.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-02-02 18:35:20 | Re: GetOldestXmin going backwards is dangerous after all |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-02-02 18:32:44 | Re: GetOldestXmin going backwards is dangerous after all |