From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Wood, Dan" <hexpert(at)amazon(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
Date: | 2017-09-28 21:47:30 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzne7UAzyng6zQ63=KYtYZc0J30_V4vgn5jt9FtECs9Lqw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>> FWIW, I am reminded a little bit of the MultiXact/recovery bug I
>> reported way back in February of 2014 [1], which also had a HOT
>> interaction that caused index scans to give wrong answers, despite
>> more or less structurally sound indexes.
>>
>> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZTMQiCi5PV5OWHb+bYkUcnCk=O67w0cSswPvV7XfUcU5g@mail.gmail.com
>
> Thanks for the reference. I didn't remember this problem and it's not
> (wasn't) in my list of things to look into. Perhaps these are both the
> same bug.
I was reminded of that old bug because initially, at the time, it
looked very much like a corrupt index: sequential scans were fine, but
index scans gave wrong answers. This is what I saw today.
In the end, commit 6bfa88a fixed that old recovery bug by making sure
the recovery routine heap_xlog_lock() did the right thing. In both
cases (Feb 2014 and today), the index wasn't really corrupt -- it just
pointed to the root of a HOT chain when it should point to some child
tuple (or maybe a successor HOT chain).
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-09-28 22:09:38 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-09-28 21:39:59 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-09-28 21:48:45 | Re: Binary search in fmgr_isbuiltin() is a bottleneck. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-28 21:44:43 | Re: Arrays of domains |