Re: nested transactions

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> But we already have a recycling mechanism for pg_clog.  AFAICS,
>> creating a parallel log file with a separate recycling mechanism is
>> a study in wasted effort.

> But that recycling requires the vacuum of every database in the system. 
> Do people do that frequently enough?

Once the auto vacuum code is in there, they won't have any choice ;-)

In any case, I saw no part of your proposal that removed the need for
vacuum, so what's your point?
        regards, tom lane