From: | Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Tuples inserted and deleted by the same transaction |
Date: | 2022-09-13 08:47:16 |
Message-ID: | CAN-LCVPzTbeKx6U8vyb0TGbw_Zff+jv=RArZy7Oh7CO6g7_V+A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi!
Please correct me if I'm wrong, despite tuples being inserted and deleted
by the same
transaction - they are visible inside the transaction and usable by it, so
considering them
dead and cleaning up during execution is a bad idea until the
transaction is ended.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:06 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
wrote:
> Shouldn't such tuples be considered dead right away, even if the inserting
> transaction is still active? That would allow cleaning them up even before
> the transaction is done.
>
> There is this code in HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuumHorizon:
>
> else if
> (TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId(HeapTupleHeaderGetRawXmin(tuple)))
> {
> [...]
> /* inserted and then deleted by same xact */
> if
> (TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId(HeapTupleHeaderGetUpdateXid(tuple)))
> return HEAPTUPLE_DELETE_IN_PROGRESS;
>
> Why HEAPTUPLE_DELETE_IN_PROGRESS and not HEAPTUPLE_DEAD?
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>
>
> --
Regards,
Nikita Malakhov
Postgres Professional
https://postgrespro.ru/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-09-13 09:10:00 | Re: Splitting up guc.c |
Previous Message | John Naylor | 2022-09-13 08:46:22 | Re: proposal: possibility to read dumped table's name from file |