Re: Vacuum ERRORs out considering freezing dead tuples from before OldestXmin
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>,
Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Date: 2024-06-24T20:51:24Z
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 →
-
Test that vacuum removes tuples older than OldestXmin
- 2c0bc4765741 17.6 landed
- 303ba0573ce6 18.0 landed
- 80c34692e8e6 17.0 landed
- aa607980aee0 18.0 landed
-
Lower minimum maintenance_work_mem to 64kB
- 2eda3df9ad53 17.0 landed
- bbf668d66fbf 18.0 landed
-
Add accidentally omitted test to meson build file
- 9d198f4d3e3b 16.4 landed
-
Use DELETE instead of UPDATE to speed up vacuum test
- 924a08b76f5d 14.13 landed
- 9744fe24118b 15.8 landed
- 571e0ee40ebd 16.4 landed
-
Revert "Test that vacuum removes tuples older than OldestXmin"
- efcbb76efe40 18.0 landed
- 1a3e90948b50 17.0 landed
-
Ensure vacuum removes all visibly dead tuples older than OldestXmin
- fd4f12df5e46 17.0 landed
- 83c39a1f7f3f 18.0 landed
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 4:36 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure I understand. The most important thing here is fixing the > bug. But if we have a choice of how to fix the bug, I'd prefer to do > it by having the pruning code test one horizon that is always correct, > rather than (as I think the patch does) having it test against two > horizons because as a way of covering possible discrepancies between > those values. Your characterizing of OldestXmin + vistest as two horizons seems pretty arbitrary to me. I know what you mean, of course, but it seems like a distinction without a difference. > I thought the idea was that the GlobalVisTest stuff would force a > recalculation now and then, but maybe it doesn't actually do that? It definitely can do that. Just not in a way that meaningfully increases the number of heap tuples that we can recognize as DEAD and remove. At least not currently. > Suppose process A begins a transaction, acquires an XID, and then goes > idle. Process B now begins a giant vacuum. At some point in the middle > of the vacuum, A ends the transaction. Are you saying that B's > GlobalVisTest never really notices that this has happened? That's my understanding, yes. That is, vistest is approximately the same thing as OldestXmin anyway. At least for now. -- Peter Geoghegan