Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Possible bug in vacuum redo

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: "Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev(at)sectorbase(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Possible bug in vacuum redo
Date: 2001-12-23 01:45:23
Message-ID: 19580.1009071923@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> Another thing I am currently looking at is that I do not believe VACUUM
>> handles tuple chain moves correctly.  It only enters the chain-moving
>> logic if it finds a tuple that is in the *middle* of an update chain,
>> ie, both the prior and next tuples still exist. 
>        ^^^^^
> Isn't it *either* not *both* ?

[ reads it again ]  Oh, you're right.

Still, if WAL isn't taking care to maintain t_ctid then we have a
problem.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-12-23 01:56:09
Subject: Re: default modifiers for 7.2b4
Previous:From: mikeDate: 2001-12-23 01:25:57
Subject: default modifiers for 7.2b4

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group