From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Change behavior of (m)xid_age |
Date: | 2015-10-22 22:07:06 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYVDmW-9715cJoD=-jDOd4UKT+VBDTGb0aQ5KL97PdM+w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> It's also a permanent ID when the relation is first created.
No it isn't. If it were, the first insert into the table would have
to update the pg_class tuple, which it certainly doesn't. Before we
had MVCC catalog scans, that wouldn't have been possible with less
than AccessExclusiveLock, and it would still require a self-exclusive
relation lock, which would be a deadlock hazard if multiple processes
tried to access the relation at once. Also:
rhaas=# create table foo (a int);
CREATE TABLE
rhaas=# select relfrozenxid from pg_class where relname = 'foo';
relfrozenxid
--------------
946
(1 row)
> I agree that you can just ignore relfrozenxid = 0, but it seems kinda silly
> to force everyone to do that (unless there's some use case for the current
> 'infinity behavior' that I'm not seeing).
Well, if the only purpose of age() were to be applied to every
pg_class.relfrozenxid value, I might agree with you. But I'm not sure
that's so; for example, it could be applied to XID fields from
individual tuples. And there is certainly a backward-compatibility
argument for not changing the semantics now.
> BTW, ignoring relfrozenxid = 0 also isn't as easy as you'd think:
>
> select count(*) from pg_class where relfrozenxid <> 0;
> ERROR: operator does not exist: xid <> integer at character 50
It takes a few more characters than that, but it's not really that hard.
rhaas=# select count(*) from pg_class where relfrozenxid::text <> '0';
count
-------
81
(1 row)
You can alternatively search for the correct set of relkinds.
> So first we make the user add the WHERE clause, then we make them figure out
> how to work around the missing operator...
Before any of that, we make them learn what relfrozenxid is and what
age() does. Once they've learned that, I don't think the few extra
characters to filter out zeroes is really a big deal. Most of these
queries are presumably being issued by monitoring software anyway, and
hopefully commonly-used monitoring tools already include a suitable
query. Rolling your own monitoring queries from scratch for a
high-value production system is not an especially good idea.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-10-22 22:07:38 | Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-10-22 22:03:30 | Re: Avoid full page images in streaming replication? |