freeze cannot be finished

From: Миша Тюрин <tmihail(at)bk(dot)ru>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Sergey Burladyan <eshkinkot(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: freeze cannot be finished
Date: 2013-11-16 20:05:55
Message-ID: 1384632355.250156225@f64.i.mail.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello!

Could anyone review patch suggested by Jeff Janes ?

Initial thread http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1384356585(dot)995240612(at)f50(dot)i(dot)mail(dot)ru#1384356585(dot)995240612@f50.i.mail.ru

Thanks in advance!

>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Sergey Burladyan < eshkinkot(at)gmail(dot)com > wrote:
> >Jeff Janes < jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com > writes:
> >
> >If I not mistaken, looks like lazy_scan_heap() called from lazy_vacuum_rel()
> >(see [1]) skip pages, even if it run with scan_all == true, lazy_scan_heap()
> >does not increment scanned_pages if lazy_check_needs_freeze() return false, so
> >if this occurred at wraparound vacuum it cannot update pg_class, because
> >pg_class updated via this code:
> >
> >    new_frozen_xid = FreezeLimit;
> >    if (vacrelstats->scanned_pages < vacrelstats->rel_pages)
> >        new_frozen_xid = InvalidTransactionId;
> >
> >    vac_update_relstats(onerel,
> >                        new_rel_pages,
> >                        new_rel_tuples,
> >                        new_rel_allvisible,
> >                        vacrelstats->hasindex,
> >                        new_frozen_xid);
> >
> >so i think in our prevent wraparound vacuum vacrelstats->scanned_pages always
> >less than vacrelstats->rel_pages and pg_class relfrozenxid never updated.
>
> Yeah, I think that that is a bug.  If the clean-up lock is unavailable but the page is inspected without it and found not to need freezing, then the page needs to be counted as scanned, but is not so counted.
>
> commit bbb6e559c4ea0fb4c346beda76736451dc24eb4e
> Date:   Mon Nov 7 21:39:40 2011 -0500
>
> But this was introduced in 9.2.0, so unless the OP didn't upgrade to 9.2 until recently, I don't know why it just started happening.
>
> It looks like a simple fix (to HEAD attached), but I don't know how to test it.
>
> Also, it seem like it might be worth issuing a warning if scan_all is true but all was not scanned.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

>

--

Attachment Content-Type Size
fix_freeze.patch application/x-patch 478 bytes

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2013-11-16 20:17:40 Re: Review:Patch: SSL: prefer server cipher order
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2013-11-16 20:04:21 Re: additional json functionality