Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica/ proof of concept

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I can propose following alternative approach: teach read-only queries on
>> > hot
>> > standby to tolerate concurrent relation truncation.  Therefore, when
>> > non-existent heap page is accessed on hot standby, we can know that it
>> > was
>> > deleted by concurrent truncation and should be assumed to be empty.  Any
>> > thoughts?
>>
>> Sounds like it might break MVCC?
>
> I don't know why it might be broken.  VACUUM truncates heap only when tail
> to be truncated is already empty.  When applying truncate WAL record,
> previous WAL records deleting all those tuples in the tail are already
> applied.  Thus, if even MVCC is broken and we will miss some tuples after
> heap truncation, they were anyway were gone before heap truncation.

Ah - I was thinking of the TRUNCATE command, rather than truncation by
VACUUM.  Your argument makes sense, although the case where the
relation is truncated and later re-extended might need some thought.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers