Euler Taveira de Oliveira escribió: > Alvaro Herrera escreveu: > > This could be solved if the workers kept the whole history of tables > > that they have vacuumed. Currently we keep only a single table (the one > > being vacuumed right now). I proposed writing these history files back > > when workers were first implemented, but the idea was shot down before > > flying very far because it was way too complex (the rest of the patch > > was more than complex enough.) Maybe we can implement this now. > > > [I don't remember your proposal...] Isn't it just add a circular linked list > at AutoVacuumShmemStruct? Of course some lock mechanism needs to exist to > guarantee that we don't write at the same time. The size of this linked list > would be scale by a startup-time-guc or a reasonable fixed value.
Well, the problem is precisely how to size the list. I don't like the idea of keeping an arbitrary number in memory; it adds another mostly-useless tunable that we'll need to answer questions about for all eternity. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
