Re: GiST VACUUM
x4mmm@yandex-team.ru
From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Костя Кузнецов <chapaev28@ya.ru>
Date: 2018-07-14T07:26:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> 14 июля 2018 г., в 0:28, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> написал(а): > > On 13/07/18 21:28, Andrey Borodin wrote: >>> 13 июля 2018 г., в 18:25, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> >>> написал(а): >>> Looking at the second patch, to scan the GiST index in physical >>> order, that seems totally unsafe, if there are any concurrent page >>> splits. In the logical scan, pushStackIfSplited() deals with that, >>> by comparing the page's NSN with the parent's LSN. But I don't see >>> anything like that in the physical scan code. >> Leaf page can be pointed by internal page and rightlink >> simultaneously. The purpose of NSN is to visit this page exactly once >> by following only on of two links in a scan. This is achieved >> naturally if we read everything from the beginning to the end. (That >> is how I understand, I can be wrong) > > The scenario where this fails goes like this: > > 1. Vacuum scans physical pages 1-10 > 2. A concurrent insertion splits page 15. The new left half stays on page 15, but the new right half goes to page 5 > 3. Vacuum scans pages 11-20 > > Now, if there were any dead tuples on the right half of the split, moved to page 5, the vacuum would miss them. > > The way this is handled in B-tree is that when a page is split, the page is stamped with current "vacuum cycle id". When the vacuum scan encounters a page with the current cycle id, whose right-link points to a lower-numbered page, it immediately follows the right link, and re-scans it. I.e. in the above example, if it was a B-tree, in step 3 when vacuum scans page 15, it would see that it was concurrently split. It would immediately vacuum page 5 again, before continuing the scan in physical order. > > We'll need to do something similar in GiST. OK, I will do this. This is tradeoff between complex concurrency feature and possibility of few dead tuples left after VACUUM. I want to understand: is it something dangerous in this dead tuples? There is one more serious race condition: result of first scan is just a hint where to look for downlinks to empty pages. If internal page splits between scan and cleanup, offsets of downlinks will be changed, cleanup will lock pages, see non-empty pages and will not delete them (though there are not dead tuples, just not deleted empty leafs). Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
Commits
-
Use full 64-bit XID for checking if a deleted GiST page is old enough.
- fb5344c969af 12.0 landed
- 6655a7299d83 13.0 landed
-
Refactor checks for deleted GiST pages.
- e2e992c93145 12.0 landed
- 9eb5607e6993 13.0 landed
-
Delete empty pages during GiST VACUUM.
- 7df159a620b7 12.0 landed
-
Scan GiST indexes in physical order during VACUUM.
- fe280694d0d4 12.0 landed
-
Prevent GIN deleted pages from being reclaimed too early
- 52ac6cd2d0cd 12.0 cited