Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Chris Travers <chris@orioledata.com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>,
pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Chris Travers <chris.travers@gmail.com>, Fedor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>,
Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik@garret.ru>, Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru>,
Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2022-11-28T22:06:06Z
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 →
-
Add SLRU tests for 64-bit page case
- a60b8a58f435 17.0 landed
-
Make use FullTransactionId in 2PC filenames
- 5a1dfde8334b 17.0 landed
-
Use larger segment file names for pg_notify
- 2cdf131c46e6 17.0 landed
-
Index SLRUs by 64-bit integers rather than by 32-bit integers
- 4ed8f0913bfd 17.0 landed
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 1:52 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > I think the problem is that we still have bloat with 64-bit XIDs, > specifically pg_xact and pg_multixact files. Yes, that bloat is less > serious, but it is still an issue worth reporting in the server logs, > though not serious enough to stop the server from write queries. That's definitely a big part of it. Again, I don't believe that the idea is fundamentally without merit. Just that it's not worth it, given that having more XID space is very much not something that I think fixes most of the problems. And given the real risk of serious bugs with something this invasive. I believe that it would be more useful to focus on just not getting into trouble in the first place, as well as on mitigating specific problems that lead to the system reaching xidStopLimit in practice. I don't think that there is any good reason to allow datfrozenxid to go past about a billion. When it does the interesting questions are questions about what went wrong, and how that specific failure can be mitigated in a fairly direct way. We've already used way to much "XID space runway", so why should using even more help? It might, I suppose, but it almost seems like a distraction to me, as somebody that wants to make things better for users in general. As long as the system continues to misbehave (in whatever way it happens to be misbehaving), why should any amount of XID space ever be enough? I think that we'll be able to get rid of freezing in a few years time. But as long as we have freezing, we have these problems. -- Peter Geoghegan