Re: lastOverflowedXid does not handle transaction ID wraparound

From: Stan Hu <stanhu(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: lastOverflowedXid does not handle transaction ID wraparound
Date: 2021-11-03 23:27:35
Message-ID: CAMBWrQmMLNhmbO5v65hKMZcd2q_u_TuZ2J2GkG-Fe_CmccubGw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Good catch on doing this in ExpireAllKnownAssignedTransactionIds() as well.
Thanks. Looks good to me!

As Nikolay mentioned, I think this is an important bug that we are seeing
in production and would appreciate a backport to v12 if possible.

On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 3:07 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 8:51 PM Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > It is however, an undocumented modularity violation. I think that is
> > acceptable because of the ProcArrayLock traffic, but needs to have a
> > comment to explain this at the call to
> > ExpireOldKnownAssignedTransactionIds() i.e. " and potentially reset
> > lastOverflowedXid", as well as a comment on the
> > ExpireOldKnownAssignedTransactionIds() function.
>
> Thank you for your feedback. Please find the revised patch attached.
> It incorporates this function comment changes altogether with minor
> editings and commit message. Let me know if you have further
> suggestions.
>
> I'm going to push this if no objections.
>
> ------
> Regards,
> Alexander Korotkov
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-11-03 23:33:08 Why doesn't GiST VACUUM require a super-exclusive lock, like nbtree VACUUM?
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2021-11-03 23:21:38 Re: minor gripe about lax reloptions parsing for views