From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Kouber Saparev <kouber(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: VACUUM unable to accomplish because of a non-existent MultiXactId |
Date: | 2015-11-27 20:47:57 |
Message-ID: | 20151127204757.GF4320@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Couldn't creation and deletion of a toasted object within the same
> >> transaction do it?
>
> > I tried and couldn't find a way to cause one to appear. When a row is
> > created, it has xmax=0 so when it's deleted the xmax can just be set to
> > the deleting xact. And we don't ever update pg_toast rows, AFAIK.
>
> Ah, nevermind, brain fade ... I was momentarily confusing this with
> combo CIDs. Right, there are no updates or row locks taken on toast
> table rows (unless someone were to do one manually?)
Both UPDATE and SELECT FOR UPDATE fail right away:
alvherre=# update pg_toast.pg_toast_16398 set chunk_id = 7 where chunk_id = 5;
ERROR: cannot change TOAST relation "pg_toast_16398"
alvherre=# select * from pg_toast.pg_toast_16398 for update;
ERROR: cannot lock rows in TOAST relation "pg_toast_16398"
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kouber Saparev | 2015-11-28 10:52:58 | Re: VACUUM unable to accomplish because of a non-existent MultiXactId |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-11-27 20:35:26 | Re: VACUUM unable to accomplish because of a non-existent MultiXactId |