From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bug in VACUUM reporting of "removed %d row versions" in 9.2+ |
Date: | 2013-05-10 18:37:20 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY95BZ50VVp78wLvLLAjiuWSCDZGyEWAerW2__0XEWB2g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Commit d0dcb315db0043f10073a9a244cea138e9e60edd and previous
> introduced a bug into the reporting of removed row versions. ('Twas
> myself et al, before you ask).
>
> In those commits, lazy_vacuum_heap() skipped pinned blocks, but then
> failed to report that accurately, claiming that the tuples were
> actually removed when they were not. That bug has masked the effect of
> the page skipping behaviour.
>
> Bug is in 9.2 and HEAD.
>
> Attached patch corrects that, with logic to move to the next block
> rather than re-try the lock in a tight loop once per tuple, which was
> mostly ineffective.
>
> Attached patch also changes the algorithm slightly to retry a skipped
> block by sleeping and then retrying the block, following observation
> of the effects of the current skipping algorithm once skipped rows are
> correctly reported.
>
> It also adds a comment which explains the skipping behaviour.
>
> Viewpoints?
I think this patch as currently written is going to leave us with the
following dubious-looking construct.
if (!ConditionalLockBufferForCleanup(buf))
{
if (!ConditionalLockBufferForCleanup(buf))
{
Modulo that minor gripe, I think it's definitely worth doing this in
master. I'm a bit disinclined to change the message string in 9.2,
and therefore might not back-patch at all, since there's basically no
consequence to this except for mildly inaccurate reporting. But if
people feel it's worth a translation break for this, I don't object to
back-patching it either.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-05-10 18:55:40 | Re: Bug in VACUUM reporting of "removed %d row versions" in 9.2+ |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2013-05-10 18:16:54 | Re: pgcrypto: Fix RSA password-protected keys |