public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
To: Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Banck <[email protected]>
Cc: Junwang Zhao <[email protected]>
Cc: Kirill Reshke <[email protected]>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:33:54 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <178741.1743514291@localhost>

On 2025-Apr-01, Antonin Houska wrote:

> Besides that, it occurred to me that 0005 ("Preserve visibility
> information of the concurrent data changes.") will probably introduce
> significant overhead. The problem is that the table we're repacking is
> treated like a catalog, for reorderbuffer.c to generate snapshots that
> we need to replay UPDATE / DELETE commands on the new table.
> 
> contrib/test_decoding can be used to demonstrate the difference
> between ordinary and catalog tables:
> 
> [.. ordinary ..]
> Execution Time: 3521.190 ms
> [.. catalog ..]
> Execution Time: 6561.634 ms

Significant indeed.  Thinking about the scenarios in which I envision
people using REPACK CONCURRENTLY (mostly, cases where very large tables
have accumulated considerable amounts of bloat) and considering the size
of the patch, I think the case for treating it as concurrent-safe is not
credible, at least not at this stage -- not only because of this
performance impact, but also because of the additional code complexity,
which I'm really doubtful we can address at this stage.  I would suggest
to put that patch aside for now, maybe with a doc warning that
"repacking a table would cause visibility information to be lost"; and
then address that aspect later on, after this feature has gone through
some battle-hardening.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Las navajas y los monos deben estar siempre distantes"   (Germán Poo)

view thread (7+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox