Re: DELETE versus TRUNCATE during pg_dump....
| От | Patrick Hatcher |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: DELETE versus TRUNCATE during pg_dump.... |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 41C8EBA1.1060306@comcast.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: DELETE versus TRUNCATE during pg_dump.... (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
Hey there Tom thanks for the answer. However, as you saw I wrote this early in the morning and forgot an important piece of information: The table at the time of the truncate was not being dumped. I could see in pg_stat_activity that it was chugging away at one of the 63M row tables I have. Does this make a difference? Tom Lane wrote: >Patrick Hatcher <pathat@comcast.net> writes: > > >>Curious: Why would a DELETE FROM tablename work while a pg_dump is >>occurring but a TRUNCATE tablename will stay in a lock state until the >>pg_dump is complete? >> >> > >TRUNCATE requires an exclusive lock on the table. > >This is pretty much a no-free-lunch situation: if you want the pg_dump >to be able to dump all the rows that existed when it started, you can >hardly expect to be able to physically remove those rows meanwhile. > > regards, tom lane > > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: