Re: Hot Standby dev build (v8)

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hot Standby dev build (v8)
Date: 2009-01-19 07:16:00
Message-ID: 497428B0.2000607@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 22:09 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>>>> RecentGlobalXmin is just a hint, it lags behind the real oldest xmin
>>>> that GetOldestXmin() would return. If another backend has a more recent
>>>> RecentGlobalXmin value, and has killed more recent tuples on the page,
>>>> the latestRemovedXid written here is too old.
>>> What do you think we should do instead?
>> Dunno. Maybe call GetOldestXmin().
>
> We are discussing btree deletes, not btree vacuums.

Pardon my ignorance, but what's the difference?

> If we are doing
> btree delete then we have an unreleased snapshot therefore we also have
> a non-zero xmin. How can another backend have a later RecentGlobalXmin
> or result from GetOldestXmin() than we do?

Sure it can, for example:

1. Transaction 1 begins in backend A
2. Transaction 2 begins in backend B, xmin = 1
3. Transaction 1 ends
4. Transaction 3 begins in backend C, xmin = 2
5. Backend C gets snapshot, TransactionXmin = 2, RecentGlobalXmin = 1
6. Transaction 2 ends.
7. Transaction 4 begins in backend A, gets snapshot TransactionXmin = 2,
RecentGlobalXmin = 2
8. Transaction 4 kills tuple, using its RecentGlobalxmin of 1
9. Transaciont 3 splits the page, emits a delete xlog record, setting
latestRemovedXid to its RecentGlobalXmin of 2

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bernd Helmle 2009-01-19 08:18:09 Re: WIP: Automatic view update rules
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2009-01-19 07:08:25 Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements