Re: Refactoring

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:57:48 +0100, I wrote:
> My first vacuum.c
>refactoring patch, rev 1.281 2004-06-08, added these comments in
>repair_frag():
>
>/*
> * VACUUM FULL has an exclusive lock on the relation. So
> * normally no other transaction can have pending INSERTs or
> * DELETEs in this relation. A tuple is either
> * (a) a tuple in a system catalog, inserted or deleted by
> * a not yet committed transaction or
> * (b) dead (XMIN_INVALID or XMAX_COMMITTED) or
> * (c) inserted by a committed xact (XMIN_COMMITTED) or
> * (d) moved by the currently running VACUUM.
> * In case (a) we wouldn't be in repair_frag() at all.
> * In case (b) we cannot be here, because scan_heap() has
> * already marked the item as unused, see continue above.
> * Case (c) is what normally is to be expected.
> * Case (d) is only possible, if a whole tuple chain has been
> * moved while processing this or a higher numbered block.
> */

It turns out that this comment is not quite correct. It is incomplete.
Case (b) should be: known dead (XMIN_INVALID, or XMAX_COMMITTED and xmax
is visible to all active transactions).

And there is a fifth possibility: (e) deleted (XMAX_COMMITTED) but at
least one active transaction does not see the deleting transaction.

The patch seems to imply that case (e) is a subcase of (b), but
effectively tuples in this state are treated more like (c).

Servus
Manfred