Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I couldn't reproduce it in a few tries.  A reasonable guess is that
>> it's triggered by autovacuum deciding to vacuum the table sometime
>> before the VACUUM FULL starts.  Anyone want to try to reproduce it?

> Hum, aren't vacuums supposed to be blocked by each other?

Sure.  I'm not thinking it's a case of concurrent vacuums (if it is,
we've got worse problems than anyone imagined), but rather that the
autovac left the table in a state that exposes a bug in the subsequent
VACUUM FULL.  Since we've whacked the tqual.c logic around recently,
the problem might actually lie there...

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to