Re: SimpleLruTruncate() mutual exclusion

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:43:09PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:26:35PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 6:51 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 1 starts, considers segment ABCD eligible to unlink
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 2 starts, considers segment ABCD eligible to unlink
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 1 unlinks segment ABCD
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 1 calls SetTransactionIdLimit()
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 1 finishes
> > > some backend calls SimpleLruZeroPage(), creating segment ABCD
> > > vac_truncate_clog() instance 2 unlinks segment ABCD
> > >
> > > Serializing vac_truncate_clog() fixes that.
> > 
> > I've wondered before (in a -bugs thread[1] about unexplained pg_serial
> > wraparound warnings) if we could map 64 bit xids to wide SLRU file
> > names that never wrap around and make this class of problem go away.
> > Unfortunately multixacts would need 64 bit support too...
> > 
> > [1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEBTBzuS-01t12GGVD6qCezce8EFD8aZ1V%2Bo_3BZ%3DbuVLQBtRg%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> That change sounds good to me.

I do think $SUBJECT should move forward independent of that.