| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |
| Date: | 2022-04-14 01:08:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzkq9rdb3=p6UrTjZuYwH3wmmnnyQ71hfYdJoZtJQ2EVnQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 6:05 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I think most of those we've ended up replacing by using temp tables in
> those tests instead, since they're not affected by the global horizon
> anymore.
Maybe, but it's a pain to have to work that way. You can't do it in
cases like this, because a temp table is not workable. So that's not
an ideal long term solution.
> > We'd not necessarily have to embed wait-for-horizon into VACUUM
> > itself.
>
> I'm not sure it'd be quite reliable outside of vacuum though, due to the
> horizon potentially going backwards (in otherwise harmless ways)?
I agree, since vacuumlazy.c would need to either be given its own
OldestXmin, or knowledge of a wait-up-to XID. Either way we have to
make non-trivial changes to vacuumlazy.c.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-04-14 01:20:04 | Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70 |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-14 01:05:15 | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |