Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 18898.1301286552@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think we've had a number of pieces of evidence that suggest that
> extending 8kB at a time is too costly, but I agree with Greg that the
> idea of extending an arbitrarily large table by 10% at a time is
> pretty frightening - that could involve allocating a gigantic amount
> of space on a big table. I would be inclined to do something like
> extend by 10% of table or 1MB, whichever is smaller.
Sure, something like that sounds sane, though the precise numbers
need some validation.
> ... And a 1MB extension is probably also small enough
> that we can do it in the foreground without too much of a hiccup.
Less than convinced about this.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: