On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 11:14 +0900, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 11/15/09 11:07 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > - When replaying b-tree deletions, we currently wait out/cancel all > > running (read-only) transactions. We take the ultra-conservative stance > > because we don't know how recent the tuples being deleted are. If we > > could store a better estimate for latestRemovedXid in the WAL record, we > > could make that less conservative. > > Simon was explaining this issue here at JPUGCon; now that I understand > it, this specific issue seems like the worst usability issue in HS now. > Bad enough to kill its usefulness for users, or even our ability to get > useful testing data; in an OLTP production database with several hundred > inserts per second it would result in pretty much never being able to > get any query which takes longer than a few seconds to complete on the > slave.
I am pretty sure that OmniTI, PgExperts, EDB and CMD all have customers that are doing more than that... This sounds pretty significant. Joshua D. Drake > > --Josh Berkus > > > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering If the world pushes look it in the eye and GRR. Then push back harder. - Salamander -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
