From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: jinhui.lai@qq.com <jinhui.lai@qq.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #19103: Canceled INSERT statement can still influence the performance of subsequent SELECT statement
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 16:51:54 +0100
Message-ID: <202511071550.ldw6ikbkcn4k@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <517270.1762268128@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 2025-Nov-04, Tom Lane wrote:
> It is not. The reason ROLLBACK is essentially free in Postgres
> is that some of the ensuing cleanup work gets done during
> subsequent table accesses. Some other DBMSes do that differently,
> but that's our choice and we're not likely to revisit it.
At least, it's the choice we have made in heapam. It's possible to make
different choices for other table AMs -- for instance, I bet OrioleDB
has made a different choice here, because of its claim that vacuum is
not needed.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"El hombre nunca sabe de lo que es capaz hasta que lo intenta" (C. Dickens)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@kurilemu.de, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, david.g.johnston@gmail.com, jinhui.lai@qq.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #19103: Canceled INSERT statement can still influence the performance of subsequent SELECT statement
In-Reply-To: <202511071550.ldw6ikbkcn4k@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox