Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM touching file but not updating relation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM touching file but not updating relation
Дата
Msg-id 15504.1321627638@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM touching file but not updating relation  (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>)
Ответы Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM touching file but not updating relation  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM touching file but not updating relation  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
>> On 11 November 2011 23:28, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> I observe that _bt_delitems_vacuum() unconditionally dirties the page
>>> and writes a WAL record, whether it has anything to do or not; and that
>>> if XLogStandbyInfoActive() then btvacuumscan will indeed call it despite
>>> there being (probably) nothing useful to do.  Seems like that could be
>>> improved.  The comment explaining why it's necessary to do that doesn't
>>> make any sense to me, either.

>> Well the effect, in the single instances I've checked, is certainly
>> more pronounced for hot_standby, but there still appears to be some
>> occurrences for minimal wal_level too.

> So would you say this is acceptable and normal activity, or is
> something awry here?

Well, it's expected given the current coding in the btree vacuum logic.
It's not clear to me why it was written like that, though.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: vpath builds and verbose error messages
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Do missed autoheader run for previous commit.