Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140722130931.GA1563@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 11:19:30PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Here's a draft patch for this. I think this will fix all cases where > > the "1" minmxid inserted by previous pg_upgrade versions is actually > > in the future at the time we run VACUUM. We would still be at risk if > > it had been in the future when pg_upgrade ran but no longer is now, > > since that would mean there could be non-lock-only mxids on disk that > > are older than "1". However, for the reasons discussed upthread, it > > seems fairly unlikely to me that people would actually get burnt in > > practice, so I'm satisfied with doing this much and no more. > > Ah, belay that: as coded, that would allow truncation of clog/multixact > as soon as any one relation in any one database had sane > frozenxid/minmxid. If we want to have any pretense of being safe, we have > to postpone truncation until *all* relations have been vacuumed. So more > like the attached, instead. Should we conclude that the multi-xact code is hopelessly complex and needs a redesign? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: