From: Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Preventing duplicate vacuums?
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:26:33 -0500
Message-ID: <1076016392.308.539.camel@jester> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200402051237.14615.josh@agliodbs.com>
References: <200402051237.14615.josh@agliodbs.com>
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 15:37, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Just occurred to me that we have no code to prevent a user from running two
> simultaneos lazy vacuums on the same table. I can't think of any
> circumstance why running two vacuums would be desirable behavior; how
> difficult would it be to make this an exception?
You have a 8 billion row table with some very high turn over tuples
(lots of updates to a few thousand rows). A partial or targeted vacuum
would be best, failing that you kick them off fairly frequently,
especially if IO isn't really an issue.
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-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pg@rbt.ca, josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Preventing duplicate vacuums?
In-Reply-To: <1076016392.308.539.camel@jester>
* 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