On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 07:11:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> More generally I think that invoking VACUUM processing from the bgwriter
> would be a serious violation of the module hierarchy, and would inflict
> more pain in the form of bugs and maintenance headaches than it could
> possibly be worth.
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One idea would be to vacuum the page if it can be determined that the
> relation doesn't have indexes. This information is generally not known,
... especially not by the page writer. You can't assume that you have
access to the relation descriptor ---
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 04:57:37PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Heh, I was about to ask for the pages with dead tuples list to be added
> to the TODO, but it seems it's already there ('Maintain a map of
> recently-expired rows'). One thing that isn't there which I remember
> being discussed was ha
To answer Simon's earlier comment about if I was looking to start
hacking on PostgreSQL... I'm not. :) I might take a look at the TODO
again, but I seem to do a great job of finding things to put on my plate
as it is. I am interested in minimizing the impact of vacuum, which is
why I brought my ide
>Hannu Krosing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On P, 2004-09-26 at 09:17, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Ross J. Reedstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > ... So, all this append-only writing leads to files with lots of dead
> > > tuples, so the vacuum command was added to reclaim space.
> >
> > Actually, I
