Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem?
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140226211805.GI4759@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem? (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a
known MultiXact problem?
Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund wrote: > static void > heap_xlog_lock(XLogRecPtr lsn, XLogRecord *record) > { > ... > HeapTupleHeaderClearHotUpdated(htup); > HeapTupleHeaderSetXmax(htup, xlrec->locking_xid); > HeapTupleHeaderSetCmax(htup, FirstCommandId, false); > /* Make sure there is no forward chain link in t_ctid */ > htup->t_ctid = xlrec->target.tid; > ... > } I think the fix is to reset HOT_UPDATED and t_ctid only if the infomask says the tuple is LOCKED_ONLY, per the attached patch. This matches what heap_lock_tuple is doing originally: if (HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY(new_infomask)) HeapTupleHeaderClearHotUpdated(tuple->t_data); HeapTupleHeaderSetXmax(tuple->t_data, xid); /* * Make sure there is no forward chain link in t_ctid. Note that in the * cases where the tuple has been updated, we must not overwrite t_ctid, * because it was set by the updater. Moreover, if the tuple has been * updated, we need to follow the update chain to lock the new versions of * the tuple as well. */ if (HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY(new_infomask)) tuple->t_data->t_ctid = *tid; -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: