Re: Vacuum-ing without disconnecting users
От | Andy Samuel |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vacuum-ing without disconnecting users |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 001101c0f451$dd3af210$0100a8c0@origin обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vacuum-ing without disconnecting users ("Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos" <thalis@cs.pitt.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi Thalis, thank's for the info. If PostgreSQL has to lock the table, then how can it operate on 24x7 ? Correct me if I'm wrong :) * pg_dump seems to able to backup the data, don't care if there's an active user * Interbase/IBPhoenix do this on the fly ( vacuum ) * Oracle and many other database doesn't even has to vacuum ( of course because different database concept ). And before somebody else out there screaming, I would like to say, yeah I know Oracle is very expensive :) Vacuuming on the fly probably a very good idea. Either automatically, like Interbase/IBPhoenix or manually, by issuing the command but not locking the table. Hopefully it goes into the TO DO list. Thank's Andy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos" <thalis@cs.pitt.edu> To: "Andy Samuel" <andysamuel@geocities.com> Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 1:40 AM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Vacuum-ing without disconnecting users > I was under the impression that vacuum was multi-user safe. It does table locking so you don't have to worry about concurrency corrupting your data. It just might take longer (either to vacuum or for a user to get a response) > > cheers, > t. > > > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Andy Samuel wrote: > > > Hi > > > > Is there a way to do the vacuum, but without throwing away active users ? > > > > TIA > > Andy > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: