From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ANALYZE counts LP_DEAD line pointers as n_dead_tup |
Date: | 2021-04-17 01:54:19 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzngsOzgkigYGVsj7E95fOhxE-k79utxuofjAunJjDZ2eA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 1:16 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I'm not sure what to do, though. Both the INDEX_CLEANUP = off case and
> the failsafe case are only intended for emergencies. And it's hard to
> know what to do in a code path that is designed to rarely or never be
> used.
How about just documenting it in comments, as in the attached patch? I
tried to address all of the issues with LP_DEAD accounting together.
Both the issue raised by Masahiko, and one or two others that were
also discussed recently on other threads. They all seem kind of
related to me.
I didn't address the INDEX_CLEANUP = off case in the comments directly
(I just addressed the failsafe case). There is no good reason to think
that the situation will resolve with INDEX_CLEANUP = off, so it didn't
seem wise to mention it too. But that should still be okay --
INDEX_CLEANUP = off has practically been superseded by the failsafe,
since it is much more flexible. And, anybody that uses INDEX_CLEANUP =
off cannot expect to never do index cleanup without seriously bad
consequences all over the place.
--
Peter Geoghegan
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-VACUUM-accounting-Explain-LP_DEAD-accounting.patch | application/x-patch | 6.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-04-17 02:17:55 | Re: terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::bad_alloc' |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-04-17 01:34:28 | Re: Bogus collation version recording in recordMultipleDependencies |