Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-11-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: > * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement > starvation > >> > > Jeff Amiel wrote: > >> Can somebody explain this one to me? because of our aud

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement starvation >> > Jeff Amiel wrote: >> Can somebody explain this one to me? because of our auditing technique, we >> have m

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-11-02 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Jeff Amiel wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> >>> No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: >>> * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement >>>starvation > > Can somebody explain this one to me? because of our auditing technique, we > have many LONG lived temp

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-11-01 Thread Jeff Amiel
Bruce Momjian wrote: No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement starvation Can somebody explain this one to me? because of our auditing technique, we have many LONG lived temp tables.(one per pooled

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-10-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Is this item closed? > > No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: > * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement >starvation Thanks. Added to TODO. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://mo

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-09-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Hammond wrote: > On 9/13/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > Is this item closed? > > > > > > No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: > > > * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid adva

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-09-13 Thread Andrew Hammond
On 9/13/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > Is this item closed? > > > > No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: > > * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement > >starvation > > Sorry, I d

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Is this item closed? > > No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: > * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement >starvation Sorry, I don't understand this. Can you give me more text? Thanks. -- Bruce

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-07-17 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Is this item closed? No, it isn't. Please add a TODO item about it: * Prevent long-lived temp tables from causing frozen-Xid advancement starvation -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prom

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-07-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
Is this item closed? --- Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > >> Yeah, we had better investigate some way to clean them up. It was never > > >> obv

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-06-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oh, I was just thinking in way for Bruce to get out of his current > situation. Oh, for that a manual "drop table" as superuser should work fine. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-06-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Yeah, we had better investigate some way to clean them up. It was never > >> obvious before that it mattered to get rid of orphan temp tables, but I > >> guess it does. > > > Would it be enough to delete the tup

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-06-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, we had better investigate some way to clean them up. It was never >> obvious before that it mattered to get rid of orphan temp tables, but I >> guess it does. > Would it be enough to delete the tuple from pg_class? No, you nee

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-06-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Well, it certainly seems like this shouldn't be happening. Maybe the > > table belonged to a session that crashed, but the pg_class entry has not > > been cleaned up -- possibly because that backend has not connected to > > that part

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] AutoVacuum Behaviour Question

2007-06-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, it certainly seems like this shouldn't be happening. Maybe the > table belonged to a session that crashed, but the pg_class entry has not > been cleaned up -- possibly because that backend has not connected to > that particular database. Hm --- a