X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 227D6D1D7FA for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 22:32:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30564-07 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:32:07 -0400 (AST) Received: from bramble.mmrd.com (unknown [65.217.53.66]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F32D1D412 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:32:05 -0400 (AST) Received: from thorn.mmrd.com (thorn.mmrd.com [172.25.10.100]) by bramble.mmrd.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i16LvMcM003948; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 16:57:22 -0500 Received: from gnvex001.mmrd.com (gnvex001.mmrd.com [192.168.3.55]) by thorn.mmrd.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i16MW4l10328; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:32:04 -0500 Received: from camel.mmrd.com ([172.25.5.213]) by gnvex001.mmrd.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id XT881SC2; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:32:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Preventing duplicate vacuums? From: Robert Treat To: Josh Berkus Cc: Tom Lane , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <200402051351.49983.josh@agliodbs.com> References: <200402051237.14615.josh@agliodbs.com> <11820.1076015269@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200402051351.49983.josh@agliodbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 06 Feb 2004 17:32:04 -0500 Message-Id: <1076106724.30335.41.camel@camel> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200402/242 X-Sequence-Number: 49831 On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 16:51, Josh Berkus wrote: > Tom, > > > Yes we do: there's a lock. > > Sorry, bad test. Forget I said anything. > > Personally, I would like to have the 2nd vacuum error out instead of blocking. > However, I'll bet that a lot of people won't agree with me. > Don't know if I would agree for sure, but i the second vacuum could see that it is being blocked by the current vacuum, exiting out would be a bonus, since in most scenarios you don't need to run that second vacuum so it just ends up wasting resources (or clogging other things up with it lock) Robert Treat -- Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL