| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: hot_standby_feedback vs excludeVacuum and snapshots |
| Date: | 2018-06-08 05:55:15 |
| Message-ID: | CANP8+jJMP0h80YYk32Da96vZ+3V6jqRThPU7nncoFb7kfLVMYg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | Postg윈 토토SQL : |
On 7 June 2018 at 22:19, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Wonder if the right thing here wouldn't be to instead transiently
> acquire an AEL lock during replay when truncating a relation?
The way AELs are replayed in generic, all AEL requests are handled that way.
So yes, you could invent a special case for this specific situation.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2018-06-08 05:59:17 | Re: hot_standby_feedback vs excludeVacuum and snapshots |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2018-06-08 05:22:26 | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? |