On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi, Amit
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 8:02 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Long transactions often annoy users because if a long transaction
>>> exists on a database v
Hi, Amit
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 8:02 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Long transactions often annoy users because if a long transaction
>> exists on a database vacuum cannot reclaim efficiently. There are
>> several reason why the
Masahiko Sawada writes:
> I think that to decide which deleted tuples must be preserved we don't
> need to care about backend PGXACT.xid but must care about PGXACT.xmin.
Surely this is wrong? Assume that the XID in question is the oldest one
visible in the ProcArray (if it isn't, the question is
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Long transactions often annoy users because if a long transaction
> exists on a database vacuum cannot reclaim efficiently. There are
> several reason why they exist on a database but it's a common case
> where users or application
Hi,
Long transactions often annoy users because if a long transaction
exists on a database vacuum cannot reclaim efficiently. There are
several reason why they exist on a database but it's a common case
where users or applications forget to commit/rollback transactions.
That is, transaction is not
