Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

Mikhail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>

From: Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
To: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-08-25T18:18:17Z
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. Improve REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) error messages some more

  2. Add CONCURRENTLY option to REPACK

  3. Make index_concurrently_create_copy more general

  4. Document the 'command' column of pg_stat_progress_repack

  5. Introduce the REPACK command

  6. Split vacuumdb to create vacuuming.c/h

  7. Revert changes to CONCURRENTLY that "sped up" Xmin advance

Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>:
> I think the problem is that HeapTupleSatisfiesSelf() uses
> TransactionIdIsInProgress() instead of checking the snapshot:

Yes, some issues might be possible for SnapshotSelf.
Possible solution is to override TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId
to true (like you did with nParallelCurrentXids but just return true).
IIUC, in that case all checks are going to behave the same way as in v5 version.

> I'd prefer optimization of the logical decoding for REPACK CONCURRENTLY, and
> using the MVCC snapshots.

It is also possible, but it is much more complex and feels like overkill to me.
We need just a way to find the latest version of row in the world of
all-committed transactions without any concurrent writers - I am
pretty sure it is possible to achieve in a more simple and effective
way.