On Apr 1, 2011, at 4:48 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am not so concerned about this case but about other cases where we are
> computing xid distances across the invalid range.
Bruce, I think you hit the nail on the head earlier:
> To do the right thing every computation that passes over the xid
> wraparound bounary should subtract FirstNormalTransactionId, not just
> those that fall in the boundry.
Put another way: XID calculations should not use just +/-, but an operator (presumably a macro) that understands wraparound and the special values. Surely we have a similar problem in the code that increments XIDs, and possibly other places as well.
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jim Nasby||Date: 2011-04-01 22:15:55|
|Subject: Re: Lock problem with autovacuum truncating heap |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2011-04-01 21:52:49|
|Subject: Re: Bug in autovacuum.c?|