From: Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] VACUUM Improvements - WIP Patch
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:31:37 -0400
Message-ID: <48B21989.9090200@zeut.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25792.1219605368@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <2e78013d0807132050j16cdc558s4dc3f889371a937d@mail.gmail.com>
<200808230336.m7N3aOc15945@momjian.us>
<b42b73150808240630r59ad34f3l24a980280cdc52d9@mail.gmail.com>
<48B1831F.7010002@commandprompt.com>
<48B1AB17.9010905@zeut.net>
<25792.1219605368@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes:
>
>> I think everyone agrees that partial vacuums would be useful / *A Good
>> Thing* but it's the implementation that is the issue.
>>
>
> I'm not sure how important it will really be once we have support for
> dead-space-map-driven vacuum.
Is that something we can expect any time soon? I haven't heard much
about it really happening for 8.4.
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-patches@postgresql.org
Cc: matthew@zeut.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, jd@commandprompt.com, mmoncure@gmail.com, bruce@momjian.us, pavan.deolasee@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] VACUUM Improvements - WIP Patch
In-Reply-To: <48B21989.9090200@zeut.net>
* 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