Re: BUG #17257: (auto)vacuum hangs within lazy_scan_prune()

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 02:57:34PM -0500, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 2:38 PM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > > I'm referring to calls such as the
> > > "GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId(NULL)" and
> > > "GlobalVisCheckRemovableFullXid()" calls that take place inside
> > > _bt_pendingfsm_finalize(). It's not like we do stuff like that in very
> > > many other places.
> >
> > I see what you mean about the rarity and potential importance of
> > "GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId(NULL)". There's just one other caller,
> > vac_update_datfrozenxid(), which calls it for an unrelated cause.
>
> I just noticed another detail that adds significant weight to this
> theory: it looks like the problem is hit on the first tuple located on
> the first heap page that VACUUM scans *after* it completes its first
> round of index vacuuming (I'm inferring this from vacrel state,
> particular its lpdead_items instrumentation counter). The dead_items
> array is as large as possible here (just under 1 GiB), and
> lpdead_items is 178956692 (which uses up all of our dead_items space).
> VACUUM scans tens of gigabytes of heap pages before it begins this
> initial round of index vacuuming (according to vacrel->scanned_pages).
>
> What are the chances that all of this is just a coincidence? Low, I'd say.

Agreed. I bet you've made an important finding, there.