From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin |
Date: | 2024-06-25 01:49:53 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzn7EqLndKP4pVtxd8QHvTa_Ev_gU=tELz-aaC3Q0yGuTA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 9:30 PM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 03:23:39PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > Right now, in master, we do use a single horizon when determining what
> > is pruned -- that from GlobalVisState. OldestXmin is only used for
> > freezing and full page visibility determinations. Using a different
> > horizon for pruning by vacuum than freezing is what is causing the
> > error on master.
>
> Agreed, and I think using different sources for pruning and freezing is a
> recipe for future bugs. Fundamentally, both are about answering "is
> snapshot_considers_xid_in_progress(snapshot, xid) false for every snapshot?"
> That's not to say this thread shall unify the two, but I suspect that's the
> right long-term direction.
What does it really mean to unify the two, though?
If the OldestXmin field was located in struct GlobalVisState (next to
definitely_needed and maybe_needed), but everything worked in
essentially the same way as it will with Melanie's patch in place,
would that count as unifying the two? Why or why not?
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-06-25 01:57:12 | Re: Add pg_get_acl() function get the ACL for a database object |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2024-06-25 01:30:04 | Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin |