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