Horton

Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-04-24T02:56:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:53 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I mainly suggested it because to me the current seems hard to
> understand. I do think it'd be better to check more often. But checking
> depending on the amount of dead tuples at the right time doesn't strike
> me as a good idea - a lot of anti-wraparound vacuums will mainly be
> freezing tuples, rather than removing a lot of dead rows. Which makes it
> hard to understand when the failsafe kicks in.

I'm convinced -- decoupling the logic from the one-pass-not-two pass
case seems likely to be simpler and more useful. For both the one pass
and two pass/has indexes case.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Commits

  1. Fix meson installation of xid_wraparound test.

  2. Add tests for XID wraparound.

  3. Add option to specify timeout seconds to BackgroundPsql.pm.

  4. Fix wrong description of BackgroundPsql's timeout.

  5. Refactor background psql TAP functions

  6. Consider triggering VACUUM failsafe during scan.

  7. Fix autovacuum log output heap truncation issue.