Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations
Date: 2022-02-20 03:18:25
Message-ID: CAH2-WzkUXpAMKpytrRUtPkfQSXznaas3EyEsh7rLUrhsCqzuQw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 7:01 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> It's kind of surprising that this needs this
> 0001-Add-adversarial-ConditionalLockBuff to break. I suspect it's a question
> of hint bits changing due to lazy_scan_noprune(), which then makes
> HeapTupleHeaderIsHotUpdated() have a different return value, preventing the
> "If the tuple is DEAD and doesn't chain to anything else"
> path from being taken.

That makes sense as an explanation. Goes to show just how fragile the
"DEAD and doesn't chain to anything else" logic at the top of
heap_prune_chain really is.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-02-20 03:28:33 Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-02-20 03:07:39 Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations