| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
| Date: | 2011-03-08 08:37:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4D75EAC4.7090008@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On 08.03.2011 10:00, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Another idea is to give up on the warning when it appears that
> oldestxmin has moved backwards, and assume that it's actually fine. We
> could still warn in other cases where the flag appears to be incorrectly
> set, like if there is a deleted tuple on the page.
This is probably a better idea at least in back-branches. It also
handles the case of twiddling vacuum_defer_cleanup_age, which tracking
two xmins per transactions would not handle.
Here's a patch. I also changed the warning per Robert's suggestion.
Anyone see a hole in this?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| silence-bogus-all-visible-warning-1.patch | text/x-diff | 2.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | daveg | 2011-03-08 08:38:08 | Re: Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-03-08 08:00:01 | Re: Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | daveg | 2011-03-08 08:38:08 | Re: Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2011-03-08 08:16:06 | Re: Theory of operation of collation patch |