public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Shinya Kato <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: Japin Li <[email protected]>
Cc: wenhui qiu <[email protected]>
Cc: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Report oldest xmin source when autovacuum cannot remove tuples
Date: Sun, 31 May 2026 22:06:36 +0900
Message-ID: <CAOzEurTC+5xuH_X2EBWjW0Fs9iuTq3OMA=1FfT4xx1wYbCAR6g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3bnBUxwx2npXqvHL0trI11LOOvzQ7LI0GzWqbaj5SJnk7DTb1uzStGveKwj0JJmBW4ebzGIF3az7of4I4rQeaO_PRqDnnClCduPyjM6gPgM=@scottray.io>
References: <CAOzEurSgy-gDtwFmEbj5+R9PL0_G3qYB6nnzJtNStyuf87VSVg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOzEurTNVkvvscKeEOy0WwfzyqO+J_MyXwkjRteJ_zyydteKCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGjGUAK6j4K3OMocdtPZRwTyF_U7Y47-bzxUDu4ZeUdg35Vtnw@mail.gmail.com>
<SY7PR01MB109210F944A86A8771BC5EE2AB640A@SY7PR01MB10921.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CAOzEurSa37w_wgP7SeVicsoo5ERXc4V7XQH2xee5YM-W9uRRBA@mail.gmail.com>
<SY7PR01MB10921CD524617DCF4FE8E2565B60C2@SY7PR01MB10921.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CAOzEurS5s9cbXP7XT0EHe9KynLqsjJt56mqL+ZAPKD0jvrYPBw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOzEurRAiBfN-f5juywYzjS+5rWXTSSr3jaVaCJ39TJnwvUimQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<3bnBUxwx2npXqvHL0trI11LOOvzQ7LI0GzWqbaj5SJnk7DTb1uzStGveKwj0JJmBW4ebzGIF3az7of4I4rQeaO_PRqDnnClCduPyjM6gPgM=@scottray.io>
On Sat, May 30, 2026 at 11:31 AM Scott Ray <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I guess the overhead of one more scan of the process array for every autovacuum
> > run if "log_autovacuum_min_duration" is non-zero (which is the default)
> > is acceptable.
>
>
> Could vacuum compute the blocker during ComputeXidHorizons and consume it at log time?
> Avoids the extra scan, and binds the blocker to the horizon vacuum used for pruning.
As Sami suggested in [0], I think this design is a cleaner approach
because it separates the responsibilities of ComputeXidHorizons and
the calculation of vacuum blockers.
[0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA5RZ0s%2BUUXekbeGcC-H71kW%3DMfeaUCOV%3DyEWX94NXViO2-%3DpA%40...
--
Best regards,
Shinya Kato
NTT OSS Center
view thread (34+ 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]
Subject: Re: Report oldest xmin source when autovacuum cannot remove tuples
In-Reply-To: <CAOzEurTC+5xuH_X2EBWjW0Fs9iuTq3OMA=1FfT4xx1wYbCAR6g@mail.gmail.com>
* 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