Thread

  1. Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits

    Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> — 2025-12-02T14:11:34Z

    Hi, Heikki!
    
    On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 12:07 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
    > Looking at the upgrade code, in light of the "IPC/MultixactCreation on
    > the Standby server" thread [1], I think we need to make it more
    > tolerant. It's possible that there are 0 offsets in
    > pg_multixact/offsets. That might or might not be a problem: it's OK as
    > long as those multixids don't appear in any heap table, or you might
    > actually have lost those multixids, which is bad but the damage has
    > already been done and upgrade should not get stuck on it.
    > GetOldMultiXactIdSingleMember() currently asserts that the offset is
    > never zero, but it should try to do something sensible in that case
    > instead of just failing.
    
    Thank you for your work on this subject.  It's very much appreciated.
    
    I'd like to raise the question about compression again.  You have
    fairly criticized non-deterministic compression, but what do you think
    about deterministic one that I've proposed [1].  I understand that
    multixact offsets are subject of growth and their limit is not
    removed.  However, it's still several extra gigabytes for multixact
    offsets, which we could save.
    
    Links.
    1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfduDFLXATvBkUiOjyvZUBZXhK_pj5zjVpxvrJzkRVq%2B8Lw%40mail.gmail.com
    
    ------
    Regards,
    Alexander Korotkov
    Supabase