> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
>> I don't find this a compelling argument, at least not without proof that
>> the various vacuum-improvement projects already on the radar screen
>> (DSM-driven vacuum, etc) aren't going to fix your problem.
>>
>
> Is DSM going to be in 8.4? The last I had heard, DSM+related
> improvements weren't close to being guaranteed for this release. If
> it doesn't make it, waiting another year and a half for something
> easily fixed would be fairly unacceptable. Should I provide a patch
> in the event that DSM doesn't make it?
Can't hurt to submit a patch. Also, could you do something to help
mitigate the worse case, something like don't update the stats in
pg_class if the analyze finishes after a vacuum has finished since the
current analyze started?
Matt
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
No comments:
Post a Comment