Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions
От | Sami Imseih |
---|---|
Тема | Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA5RZ0uDyGW1omWqWkxyW8NB1qzsKmXhnoMtzTBeRzSd4DMatQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions
Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions Re: n_ins_since_vacuum stats for aborted transactions |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> What I am saying is n_ins_since_vacuum should not account for aborted inserts. > > It does and from what I can see it should. You need to explain why it should not. More importantly, convincingly enoughto change five year old behavior. n_ins_since_vacuum was introduced to trigger autovacuum based on the # of inserts committed, and does not care about about dead tuples in this formula. If I have a transaction that rolledback an insert of a million rows, I expect autovacuum to kick in based on the fact there are now 1 million n_dead_tup. n_ins_since_vacuumm is not relevant to the formula for this case. In other words, the reason n_ins_since_vacuum was introduced is to freeze (committed) rows, so it should not need to track dead rows to do what it intends to do. -- Sami Imseih
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: