Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5)
Дата
Msg-id 1227197641.7015.56.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 10:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> writes:
> > I wonder if we should refactor lazy_scan_heap() so that *all* the real work
> > of collecting information about dead tuples happens only in
> > heap_page_prune(). Frankly, there is only a rare chance that a tuple may
> > become DEAD after the pruning happened on the page. We can ignore such
> > tuples; they will be vacuumed/pruned in the next cycle.
> 
> > This would save us a second check of HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum on the tuples
> > which are just now checked in heap_page_prune(). In addition, the following
> > additional WAL records are then not necessary because heap_page_prune() must
> > have already logged the latestRemovedXid.
> 
> I don't think you can do that.  Couldn't someone else have run
> heap_page_prune between vacuum's first and second visit to the page?

I just looked at that in more detail and decided it was more difficult
than it first appeared. So I've left it for now.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_upgrade: How to deal with toast
Следующее
От: "Pavan Deolasee"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5)