Horton

Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery

Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-04-12T13:09:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:58 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> So while looking at this, it suddenly occurred to me that probing with
> SnapshotDirty isn't that safe for regular (non-TOAST) Oid assignment
> either.
>

Yeah it occurred to me as well, but when I looked at the code, I couldn't
find a case that is broken. I even tried a few test cases with DDLs etc.
But I think what you did is fine and more bullet proof. So +1 to that.

Thanks,
Pavan

-- 
 Pavan Deolasee                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Ignore nextOid when replaying an ONLINE checkpoint.

  2. Do not select new object OIDs that match recently-dead entries.