Re: large table

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
John R Pierce
Тема
Re: large table
Дата
Msg-id
54207C8D.5050707@hogranch.com
Ответ на
Re: large table (Luke Coldiron)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
large table Luke Coldiron <lukecoldiron@hotmail.com>
Re: large table Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: large table Luke Coldiron <lukecoldiron@hotmail.com>
Re: large table John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>
Re: large table Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: large table Luke Coldiron <lukecoldiron@hotmail.com>
Re: large table Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
Re: large table Luke Coldiron <lukecoldiron@hotmail.com>
Re: large table Eduardo Morras <emorrasg@yahoo.es>
On 9/22/2014 12:33 PM, Luke Coldiron wrote:
>
> It is possible and that is part of what I am trying to discover 
> however I am very familiar with the system / code base and in this 
> case there is a single process updating the timestamp and a single 
> process reading the timestamp. There are no other user processes 
> programmed to interact with this table outside of potentially what 
> Postgres is doing.

ANY other connection to the same postgres server, even to a different 
database, that has an open long running transaction (most frequently, 
"Idle In Transaction") will block autovacuum from marking the old tuples 
as reusable.



-- 
john r pierce                                      37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
От: Luke Coldiron
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: large table
От: Eduardo Morras
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: large table
FAQ