Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of mié nov 23 13:14:04 -0300 2011: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié nov 23 12:15:55 -0300 2011: > > > >> > And it effects shared catalogs only, which are all low traffic anyway. > >> > >> I think "low traffic" is the key point. I understand that you're not > >> changing the VACUUM behavior, but you are making heap_page_prune_opt() > >> not do anything when a shared catalog is involved. That would be > >> unacceptable if we expected shared catalogs to be updated frequently, > >> either now or in the future, but I guess we don't expect that. > > > > Maybe not pg_database or pg_tablespace and such, but I'm not so sure > > about pg_shdepend. (Do we record pg_shdepend entries for temp tables?) > > Normal catalog access does not use HOT and never has.
Oh. > If we're saying that isn't enough and we actually depend on the > occasional user inspecting the catalog then we are already hosed. Probably not. I have heard of cases of pg_shdepend getting bloated though, so it'd be nice if it happened. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
