Re: BUG #17257: (auto)vacuum hangs within lazy_scan_prune()
От | Noah Misch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17257: (auto)vacuum hangs within lazy_scan_prune() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20240110211544.0b.nmisch@google.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #17257: (auto)vacuum hangs within lazy_scan_prune() (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 02:57:34PM -0500, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 2:38 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > > > I'm referring to calls such as the > > > "GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId(NULL)" and > > > "GlobalVisCheckRemovableFullXid()" calls that take place inside > > > _bt_pendingfsm_finalize(). It's not like we do stuff like that in very > > > many other places. > > > > I see what you mean about the rarity and potential importance of > > "GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId(NULL)". There's just one other caller, > > vac_update_datfrozenxid(), which calls it for an unrelated cause. > > I just noticed another detail that adds significant weight to this > theory: it looks like the problem is hit on the first tuple located on > the first heap page that VACUUM scans *after* it completes its first > round of index vacuuming (I'm inferring this from vacrel state, > particular its lpdead_items instrumentation counter). The dead_items > array is as large as possible here (just under 1 GiB), and > lpdead_items is 178956692 (which uses up all of our dead_items space). > VACUUM scans tens of gigabytes of heap pages before it begins this > initial round of index vacuuming (according to vacrel->scanned_pages). > > What are the chances that all of this is just a coincidence? Low, I'd say. Agreed. I bet you've made an important finding, there.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: