Re: Toast issues with OldestXmin going backwards
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Toast issues with OldestXmin going backwards |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaiCVOg_auyBKQOrSiaNwitQkY__NkwKwTVyosPZAkNfQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Toast issues with OldestXmin going backwards (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: Toast issues with OldestXmin going backwards
Re: Toast issues with OldestXmin going backwards |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote: > (Or do we need to track it across restarts? maybe we do, to deal with > replication slaves without slots, or changes in parameters) Yeah, I'm worried that it might need to be persistent across restarts. One idea that occurred to me is to somehow record -- I guess in pg_class using non-transactional updates -- the last cutoff XID used to vacuum any given table. Then we could just make a rule that you can't vacuum the TOAST table with an XID that's newer than the last one used for the main table. That would preserve the property that you can vacuum the tables separately while avoiding dangling pointers. But that's obviously not back-patchable, and it sounds finicky to get right. It's really too bad that heap tables don't include a metapage where we could store details like this... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: