Horton

Re: Hot Standby btree delete records and vacuum_defer_cleanup_age

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Date: 2010-12-09T07:55:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Reduce spurious Hot Standby conflicts from never-visible records.

On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 00:16 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 09.12.2010 00:10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > On 08.12.2010 16:00, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> Heikki pointed out to me that the btree delete record processing does
> >> not respect vacuum_defer_cleanup_age. It should.
> >>
> >> Attached patch to implement that.
> >>
> >> Looking to commit in next few hours barring objections/suggestions, to
> >> both HEAD and 9_0_STABLE, in time for next minor release.
> >
> > Please note that it was Noah Misch that raised this a while ago:
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-11/msg01919.php
> 
> On closer look, that's not actually the same issue, sorry for the noise..

Heikki, this one *is* important. Will fix. Thanks for the analysis Noah.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services