Re: Idle in transaction ????

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От wsheldah@lexmark.com
Тема Re: Idle in transaction ????
Дата
Msg-id 200111161526.KAA27447@interlock2.lexmark.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Idle in transaction ????  ("Steve Brett" <steve.brett@e-mis.com>)
Список pgsql-general

That sounds great.  Thanks for clearing that up.

Wes Sheldahl



Tom Lane <tgl%sss.pgh.pa.us@interlock.lexmark.com> on 11/15/2001 05:52:00 PM

To:   "Wesley_Sheldahl/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com
cc:   pgsql-general%postgresql.org@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Wesley
      Sheldahl/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Re: [GENERAL] Idle in transaction ????


wsheldah@lexmark.com writes:
> If vacuum in 7.2 skips tables it can't lock,

It does not.

The real change in 7.2 is that vacuum requires only an ordinary writer's
lock on the table, not exclusive lock.  Since a write lock doesn't
conflict with read or write locks (basically it only conflicts with
schema-changing operations) we expect that vacuum will run concurrently
with most ordinary database operations.

               regards, tom lane





В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Helge Bahmann
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Poor performance on SCSI machines, good on IDE?
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Poor performance on SCSI machines, good on IDE?