Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140722141401.GC4190@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around
multixacts
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 2014-07-22 09:09:31 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > 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? That might be true, but I don't see the above as evidence of it. It's a nontrivial workaround for a bug; it's not surprising that it needs a couple iterations to make sense. Without the pg_upgrade bug there'd be no need to make those adjustments. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: