Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>,
Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133@gmail.com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>
Date: 2026-05-10T11:24:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 7:28 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2026-May-08, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > Some issues/inefficiencies regarding this fix and base code related to > > db-specific snapshots built during decoding: [...] > > Thanks for spending time reviewing this code. I think none of these > problems are fundamental in nature, but they are obviously worth > addressing for 19. If we hit some roadblock, we can still revert only > db-specific snapshots. > IIUC, the emails by Andres [1][2] on db-specific snapshots sound like concerns which are fundamental in nature. Apart from that as well, I think the first point mentioned in my email [3] should be at least addressed as that causes additional WAL even after reaching consistent_state for each runing_xact record for a db-specific decoder. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cdgw4sbbfcgk6du3iv54r2dgiy4tfywoklbotlmj4irxavdcr3%40glxfw5jj277q [2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/pveffyxhnuurhb44uzqlwo3rkyzorkfh2rot7uwzlf2axhfvbp%407nrs2omysxkc [3] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LygCDP3FiFzXY9iVNFcHxhf7TT_DFf7tryTu2oipmfpA%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.