On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > >> 6. This would require us to be more aggressive about VACUUMing >> old-cold relations/page, e.g. VACUUM FREEZE. This it would make >> one of our worst issues for data warehousing even worse. > > I continue to feel that it is insane that when a table is populated > within the same database transaction which created it (e.g., a bulk > load of a table or partition), that we don't write the tuples with > hint bits set for commit and xmin frozen. By the time any but the > creating transaction can see the tuples, *if* any other transaction > is ever able to see the tuples, these will be the correct values; > we really should be able to deal with it within the creating > transaction somehow.
I agree. > If we ever handle that, would #6 be a moot point, or do you think > it's still a significant issue? I think it's a moot point anyway, per previous email. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
