From: | Kuba Ouhrabka <kuba(at)comgate(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again) |
Date: | 2004-11-04 16:45:28 |
Message-ID: | cmdmbb$v40$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>The problem is fully described in thread I mentioned earlier, Tom's
>>excellent explanation can be found here:
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=cs&lr=&frame=right&th=5227028cb3449572&seekm=11390.1080964720%40sss.pgh.pa.us#link14
>
>
> Oh, that thing. Well, my opinion has not changed since April --- I
> don't think the problem justifies slowing down every transaction start.
My question was if the slowdown of every transaction start is really
needed - If it is possible to find some other solution, for example add
more logic to vacuum to pick up correct txn id (or little bit more
"correct"). But unfortunately I have no idea how to do this because of
my limited knowledge of Pg internals, the diffucult part I guess are the
shared relations...
Kuba
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-11-04 16:51:15 | Re: Minor TODO list changes |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-11-04 16:36:48 | Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again) |