Well, if they are locked waiting on vacuum, then vacuum should upgrade
it's priority to the highest waiting process (priority inheritance).
This way, vacuum will be running at a priority level equivalent to who is
waiting on it.
Regards,
Ed
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 11:41:41PM +0200, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> > You mean, like, "nice 19" or so ?
>
> ISTR someone reporting problems with locking on the performance list
> from doing exactly that. The problem is that the vacuum back end
> might take a lock and then not get any processor time -- in which
> case everybody else gets their processor slice but can't do anything,
> because they have to wait until the niced vacuum process gets back in
> line.
>
> A
>
> --
> ----
> Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
> Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> M2P 2A8
> +1 416 646 3304 x110
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
