Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits

Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>

From: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx@gmail.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-12-03T09:54:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Fix partial read handling in pg_upgrade's multixact conversion

  2. Increase timeout in multixid_conversion upgrade test

  3. Improve sanity checks on multixid members length

  4. Clarify comment on multixid offset wraparound check

  5. Never store 0 as the nextMXact

  6. Add runtime checks for bogus multixact offsets

  7. Widen MultiXactOffset to 64 bits

  8. Move pg_multixact SLRU page format definitions to a separate header

  9. Convert confusing macros in multixact.c to static inline functions

  10. Index SLRUs by 64-bit integers rather than by 32-bit integers

  11. Cope with possible failure of the oldest MultiXact to exist.

The biggest problem with compression, in my opinion, is that losing
even one byte causes the loss of the entire compressed block in the
worst case scenario. After all, we still don't have checksums for the
SLRU's, which is a shame by itself.

Again, I'm not against the idea of compression, but the risks need to
be considered.

As a software developer, I definitely want to implement compression and
save a few gigabytes. However, given my previous experience using
Postgres in real-world applications, reliability at the cost of several
gigabytes would not have caused me any trouble. Just saying.

-- 
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.