Re: Re: BUG #12990: Missing pg_multixact/members files (appears to have wrapped, then truncated)
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: BUG #12990: Missing pg_multixact/members files (appears to have wrapped, then truncated) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmoa-2UK4+wX0g8vkp8Uf=46z8m7O4XzDQKfJd=39tvQZig@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: BUG #12990: Missing pg_multixact/members files (appears to have wrapped, then truncated) (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: BUG #12990: Missing pg_multixact/members files
(appears to have wrapped, then truncated)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Restricting ourselves to selecting tables to vacuum using their > relminmxid alone makes this patch small since autovacuum already works > that way. We *could* introduce code that would be able to spread out > the work of vacuuming tables that happen to have identical or very > close relminmxid (say by introducing some non-determinism or doing > something weird based on hashing table oids and the time to explicitly > spread the start of processing over time, or <your idea here>), but I > didn't want to propose anything too big/complicated/clever/stupid and > I suspect that the relminmxid values will tend to diverge over time > (but I could be wrong about that, if they all start at 1 and then move > forward in lockstep over long periods of time then what I propose is > not good enough... let's see if we can find out). So, the problem of everything moving in lockstep is one we already have. It's actually a serious operational problem for relfrozenxid, because you might restore your database from pg_dump or similar and every table will have a very similar relfrozenxid and so then the anti-wraparound logic fires for all of them at the same time. There might be cases where MXIDs behave the same way, although I would think it would be less common. Anyway, solving that problem would be nice (particularly for xmin!), but we shouldn't get into that with relation to this bug fix. It's a problem, but one that will probably take a good deal of work to solve, and certainly not something we would back-patch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: