Re: ANALYZE to be ignored by VACUUM
| От | ITAGAKI Takahiro |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ANALYZE to be ignored by VACUUM |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20080221132641.B2BD.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: ANALYZE to be ignored by VACUUM ("Dawid Kuroczko" <qnex42@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Dawid Kuroczko" <qnex42@gmail.com> wrote: > I am sure the idea is not original, yet still I would like to know how hard > would it be to support local (per table) oldest visible XIDs. > > I mean, when transaction start you need to keep all tuples with xmin >= > oldest_xid in all tables, because who knows what table will that transaction > like to touch. Per-table oldest XID management sounds good! You mean transactions that touch no tables does not affect vacuums at all, right? If so, the solution can resolve pg_start_backup problem, too. I feel it is enough for standard maintenance commands. Another solution might need for user defined long transactions, though. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: