Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Magnus Hagander
Тема Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound
Дата
Msg-id CABUevExUHxAULzq2G47nw8LMJeH2mnh=ApaVdo+32o4i5AOfPw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Ответы Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:31 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 05:47:09PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> We could I guess add a field specifically for temp_namespace_xid or such.
> The question is if it's worth the overhead to do that.

That would mean an extra 4 bytes in PGPROC, which is something we
could live with, still the use-case looks rather narrow to me to
justify that.

It does, tha'ts why I questioned if it's worth it. But, thinking some more about it, some other options would be:

1. This is only set once per backend in normal operations, right? (Unless I go drop the schema manually, but that's not exactly normal). So maybe we could invent a pg stat message and send the information through the collector? Since it doesn't have to be frequently updated, like your typical backend_xmin.

2. Or probably even better, just put it in PgBackendStatus? Overhead here is a lot cheaper than PGPROC.

ISTM 2 is probably the most reasonable option here?

--

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations areaccessed in a transaction
Следующее
От: Konstantin Knizhnik
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Prepared transaction releasing locks before deregistering its GID