| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Smolkin Grigory <smallkeen(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: race condition in pg_class |
| Date: | 2024-05-13 20:30:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20240513203038.d7.nmisch@google.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 03:53:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 7:29 PM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > - [consequences limited to transient failure] Since a PROC_IN_VACUUM backend's
> > xmin does not stop pruning, an MVCC scan in that backend can find zero
> > tuples when one is live. This is like what all backends got in the days of
> > SnapshotNow catalog scans. See the pgbench test suite addition. (Perhaps
> > the fix is to make VACUUM do its MVCC scans outside of PROC_IN_VACUUM,
> > setting that flag later and unsetting it earlier.)
>
> Are you saying that this is a problem already, or that the patch
> causes it to start happening? If it's the former, that's horrible.
The former.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Benjamin Coutu | 2024-05-13 20:43:00 | Summary of Sort Improvement Proposals |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-05-13 20:22:53 | Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ? |