Horton

Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
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: 2026-05-23T15:29:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:52 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>
> On 2026-May-14, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > The broader issue is that the entire logical decoding mechanism is
> > designed to process cluster-wide transactions. This patch tries to
> > bypass that foundational assumption, but only during the initial
> > snapshot construction while processing running_xacts record.
> >
> > To be clear, I am not against the idea of db-specific snapshots to
> > enable concurrent repacks. My concern is simply the time required to
> > get the architecture right. In its current state, we need more time to
> > carefully consider how this db-specific concept interacts with the
> > rest of the logical decoding machinery, which is built for
> > cluster-wide records.
>
> Hmm.  So at this point I have to admit that the time I'll have before
> beta 1 is going to be very scarce.  You're probably right that it's
> better to revert db-specific snapshots in pg19, and try again for 20.
>

Sounds reasonable.

> The revert should be a simple patch.
>

I also think so.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.