Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Royce Ausburn <royce.ml@inomial.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov>
Date: 2011-11-16T14:47:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> Not sure about the log line, but allowing pgstattuple to distinguish >> between recently-dead and quite-thoroughly-dead seems useful. > > The dividing line is enormously unstable though. pgstattuple's idea of > RecentGlobalXmin could even be significantly different from that of a > concurrently running VACUUM. I can see the point of having VACUUM log > what it did, but opinions from the peanut gallery aren't worth much. Hmm, you have a point. But as Yeb points out, it seems like we should at least try to be more consistent about the terminology. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company