Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2691724.1618163730@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear
Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote: > I'm now inclined to think that we should toss every single line of that > code, take RelationGetBufferForTuple out of the equation, and have just > *one* place that rechecks for PageAllVisible having just become set. > It's a rare enough case that optimizing it is completely not worth the > code complexity and risk (er, reality) of hard-to-locate bugs. Alternatively, we could do what you suggested and redefine things so that one is only allowed to set the all-visible bit while holding superexclusive lock; which again would allow an enormous simplification in heap_update and cohorts. Either way, it's hard to argue that heap_update hasn't crossed the complexity threshold where it's impossible to maintain safely. We need to simplify it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: