On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Francisco Olarte >> <fola...@peoplecall.com> wrote: >> > After some messages due to vacuumdb auto-deadlocking itself on the >> > system tables when doing paralell vacuum of a full database I >> > suggested adding some flags to make vacuumdb process schemas. I was >> > asked wether I could write a patch for that and I am thinking on doing >> > it. >> >> What messages are you seeing, exactly? "auto-deadlocking" isn't a thing. > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/57EBC9AE.2060302%40163.com > > I wonder if the real answer isn't just to disallow -f with parallel > vacuuming.
Seems like we should figure out which catalog tables are needed in order to perform a VACUUM, and force those to be done last and one at a time. -- 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
