Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahila(dot)syed(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys
Date: 2022-12-14 17:35:52
Message-ID: 20221214173552.sshklqvwezeo52h3@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-12-14 10:55:31 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I read through 0001 again and I noticed this:
>
> typedef struct xl_heap_prune
> {
> TransactionId snapshotConflictHorizon;
> uint16 nredirected;
> uint16 ndead;
> + bool onCatalogAccessibleInLogicalDecoding;
> /* OFFSET NUMBERS are in the block reference 0 */
> } xl_heap_prune;
>
> I think this is unsafe on alignment-picky machines. I think it will
> cause the offset numbers to be aligned at an odd address.
> heap_xlog_prune() doesn't copy the data into aligned memory, so I
> think this will result in a misaligned pointer being passed down to
> heap_page_prune_execute.

I think the offset numbers are stored separately from the record, even
though it doesn't quite look like that in the above due to the way the
'OFFSET NUMBERS' is embedded in the struct. As they're stored with the
block reference 0, the added boolean shouldn't make a difference
alignment wise?

Or am I misunderstanding your point?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-12-14 17:40:03 Re: Common function for percent placeholder replacement
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2022-12-14 17:34:35 Re: fix and document CLUSTER privileges