Re: Cause of missing pg_clog files

OK, we need a decision on whether we are going to do a 7.2,3 or just
have it in beta3. If it is in 7.2.3, I would not mention it in the
beta3 release notes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Yesterday I reported a WAL problem that could lead to tuples not being
> marked as committed-good or committed-dead after we'd already removed
> the pg_clog segment that had their transaction's commit status.
> I wasn't completely satisfied with that, though, because on further
> reflection it seemed a very low-probability mechanism. I kept digging,
> and finally came to the kind of bug that qualifies as a big DOH :-(
>
> If you run a database-wide VACUUM (one with no specific target table
> mentioned) as a non-superuser, then the VACUUM doesn't process tables
> that don't belong to you. But it will advance pg_database.datvacuumxid
> anyway, which means that pg_clog could be truncated while old transaction
> references still remain unmarked in those other tables.
>
> In words of one syllable: running VACUUM as a non-superuser can cause
> irrecoverable data loss in any 7.2.* release.
>
> I think this qualifies as a "must fix" bug. I recommend we back-patch
> a fix for this into the REL7_2 branch and put out a 7.2.3 release.
> We should also fix the "can't wait without a PROC" bug that was solved
> a few days ago.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073