Re: First-draft release notes for next week's releases

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: First-draft release notes for next week's releases
Date: 2014-03-17 23:39:19
Message-ID: 20140317233919.GS16438@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-03-17 21:09:10 +0000, Greg Stark wrote:
> That said, it would be nice to actually fix the problem, not just
> detect it. Eventually vacuum would fix the problem. I think. I'm not
> really sure what will happen actually.

Indexes will quite possibly stay corrupted. I think. If there was a
index lookup for a affected row, the kill_prior_tuple logic will have
quite possibly have zapped the index entry.

Aside from that, it looks like VACUUM will have a hard time cleaning up
as well. It looks to me like heap_prune_chain() won't remove tuples that
are marked as both HeapTupleHeaderIsHeapOnly() and
HeapTupleHeaderIsHotUpdated(), i.e. intermediate tuples in a HOT
chain. Neither will lazy_scan_heap()...

I think the best way to really cleanup a table is to use something like:
ALTER TABLE rew ALTER COLUMN data TYPE text USING (data);
where text is the previous type of the column. That should trigger a
full table rewrite, without any finesse about tracking ctid chains.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-03-17 23:47:27 Re: Planner hints in Postgresql
Previous Message Joe Conway 2014-03-17 23:20:27 Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking