Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie jun 04 15:39:07 -0400 2010: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > > With in-place VACUUM FULL gone in 9.0, will there be as much need for > > > xmin/xmax forensics? > > > > You know perfectly well that no one could answer that question. > > (Or at least not answer it on the basis of facts available today.) > > Well, guess then. In the past, how many forensic cases were needed for > in-place VACUUM FULL bugs, vs. other cases?
I don't understand the question. I know I have debugged a bunch of cases of data corruption, and having xmin/xmax around has been truly useful. VACUUM FULL has never been involved (that I know of -- most of our customers tend not to run it AFAIK), so why would I care about whether it's gone in 9.0? Note that it's not always about PG bugs; but in the cases where xmin=FrozenXid for all/most involved tuples, the problems are more difficult to track down. Yes, VACUUM FULL had bugs too -- I, for one, welcome our new not-in-place VACUUM FULL overlord. -- 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
