On K, 2005-08-17 at 15:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Bruce Momjian
> <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hannu
> Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Neil Conway
> <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-
> Re: [PATCHES] PATCH to allow
> concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each
> Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:40:53 -0400
> (22:40 EEST)
> Just for the archives, attached is as far as I'd gotten with cleaning
> Hannu's patch before I realized that it wasn't doing what it needed to
> do. This fixes an end-of-transaction race condition (can't unset
> inVacuum before xact end, unless you want OldestXmin going backwards
> from the point of view of other people) and improves the documentation
> of what's going on. But unless someone can convince me that it's safe
> to mess with GetSnapshotData, it's unlikely this'll ever get applied.
Attached is a patch, based on you last one, which messes with
GetSnapshotData in what I think is a safe way.
It introduces another attribute to PROC , proc->nonInVacuumXmin and
computes this in addition to prox->xmin inside GetSnapshotData.
When (and only when) GetOldestXmin is called with ignoreVacuum=true,
then proc->nonInVacuumXmin is checked instead of prox->xmin.
I believe that this will make this change invisible to all other places
where GetSnapshotData or GetOldestXmin is used.
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Manfred Koizar||Date: 2005-08-24 12:29:22|
|Subject: Re: Must be owner to truncate?|
|Previous:||From: Robert Treat||Date: 2005-08-24 12:04:01|
|Subject: Re: 8.1 release notes|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-08-24 12:49:15|
|Subject: Re: ECPG and escape strings|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2005-08-24 05:38:46|
|Subject: Re: PL/Perl regression tests with use_strict|