Actually, while on the topic: > date: 2007-09-10 13:58:50 -0400; author: alvherre; state: Exp; lines: > +6 -2; > Remove the vacuum_delay_point call in count_nondeletable_pages, because > we hold > an exclusive lock on the table at this point, which we want to release as > soon > as possible. This is called in the phase of lazy vacuum where we > truncate the > empty pages at the end of the table.
Even with the fix the lock is held. Is the operation expected to be "fast" (for some definition of "fast") and in-memory, or is this something that causes significant disk I/O and/or scales badly with table size or similar? I.e., is this enough that, even without the .4 bug, one should not really consider VACUUM ANALYZE non-blocking with respect to other transactions? (I realize various exclusive locks are taken for short periods of time even for things that are officially declared non-blocking; the question is whether this falls into this category.) -- / Peter Schuller PGP userID: 0xE9758B7D or 'Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' Key retrieval: Send an E-Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.scode.org
pgp1Tc16hAGGQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
