On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 3 November 2015 at 15:23, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Simon Riggs
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21 October 2015 at 13:31, Jeff Janes
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3 November 2015 at 15:23, Amit Kapila
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 3 November 2015 at 15:23, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Simon Riggs
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On 3 November 2015 at 15:23, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Simon Riggs
wrote:
>>>
>>> Easy enough to do it at the end of the COPY FREEZE in
On 3 November 2015 at 15:23, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Simon Riggs
> wrote:
>
>> On 21 October 2015 at 13:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>
>> Index-only scans will visit the heap for each tuple until the
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 21 October 2015 at 13:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
>
> Index-only scans will visit the heap for each tuple until the first VACUUM
>> is done.
>>
>> The first vacuum will read the entire table, but not
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > It turns out it was pretty easy to set PD_ALL_VISIBLE on the new pages,
> > since the code in hio that requests the relation to be extended
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> It turns out it was pretty easy to set PD_ALL_VISIBLE on the new pages,
> since the code in hio that requests the relation to be extended already has
> info on the tuple's intended freeze status.
>
> Then you just need to
On 21 October 2015 at 13:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Robert Haas
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> > I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set
>>
On 18 October 2015 at 17:23, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set
> PD_ALL_VISIBLE. Or is there some reason this can't be done?
>
> Since the whole point of COPY FREEZE is to avoid needing to rewrite the
> entire table, it seems
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set
> PD_ALL_VISIBLE.
> > Or is there some reason this can't be done?
> >
> > Since
On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set PD_ALL_VISIBLE.
> Or is there some reason this can't be done?
>
> Since the whole point of COPY FREEZE is to avoid needing to rewrite the
> entire table, it seems
I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set PD_ALL_VISIBLE.
Or is there some reason this can't be done?
Since the whole point of COPY FREEZE is to avoid needing to rewrite the
entire table, it seems rather perverse that the first time the table is
vacuumed, it needs to rewrite the
13 matches
Mail list logo