Horton

Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher

Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2007-10-01T23:04:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Tom Lane wrote:
> If you insist on crafting a solution that only fixes this problem for
> pg_restore's narrow usage, you'll be back revisiting it before beta1
> has been out a month.


I don't know much about what is involved in crafting these solutions, 
but it seems we're close to beta and probably don't want to make drastic 
changes to anything.  As such it seems to me that solving the problem 
for analyze is a nice piece of low-hanging fruit that solves an 
immediate problem that has been reported.  I would think that reducing 
the locking implications of  VACUUM is much more involved, no?  Also, I 
would think that the fix for ANALYZE will be totally different than the 
fix for VACUUM no?

Are you proposing that we solve the VACUUM locking problem before we 
release 8.3?