Re: Autovacuum of independent tables

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ron
Тема Re: Autovacuum of independent tables
Дата
Msg-id 0085ec6b-353b-dff6-a91c-d5a05ad712c5@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Autovacuum of independent tables  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-general

On 9/8/20 3:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 11:16:04AM +0300, Michael Holzman wrote:
>> Autovacuum does not clean dead tuples of closed transactions in tableB
>> while there is an open transaction on tableA.
>> But the tables have nothing in common. They are handled by separate
>> applications and there are no transactions that touch both tables
>> simultaneously.
>> Why does autovacuum create an artificial dependency on the tables?
> This is called MVCC, which applies to a session as a whole.  The point
> here is that even if your application knows that only tableA is used
> by a given transaction, Postgres cannot know that, as it could be
> possible that data from tableB is needed in this same transaction, so
> old versions of the rows from tableB matching with the snapshot hold
> by this long-running transaction still have to be around.

Too bad the START TRANSACTION statement doesn't have a RESERVING clause 
where you can enumerate the tables you'll be using.

-- 
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Autovacuum of independent tables
Следующее
От: Michael Holzman
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Autovacuum of independent tables