Search Postgresql Archives

Re: VACUUM and transactions in different databases

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Cornelia Boenigk wrote:
Hi Ragnar

could not duplicate this.

I also cannot reproduce the hanging VACUUM FULL. The problem remains thet the dead tuples cannot be vemoved.

[snip]


I am interested in this. As one database cannot talk to another database in a transactional way a long running transaction in one database should not effect the vacuuming of another database. From my limited understanding VACUUM takes the lowest open transaction number and only cleans up transactions with TID's lower than that. The reason I believe that it has to use cluster wide is because the shared catalogs might be effected. Do shared catalogs follow MVCC or ACID strictly? I don't know, but I assume they don't follow both given my reading of the list.

So if shared catalogs are the problem, what happens if you just vacuum the relevant table public.dummy1 and not the whole database, does the vacuum remove all the tuples that are dead?

Is it possible to add logic for lazy vacuum that takes the lowest TID in our database when not vacuuming shared catalogs? This may already be the case, I don't know. Just putting forward suggestions.

Russell Smith


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux