Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery
Date: 2018-04-11 14:50:47
Message-ID: 16666.1523458247@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Or may be we simply err on the side of caution and scan the toast table
> with SnapshotAny while looking for a duplicate? That might prevent us from
> reusing an OID for a known-dead tuple, but should save us a second index
> scan and still work.

+1. We really don't want to expend two indexscans on this.

I was worried about changing the signature of GetNewOidWithIndex in
a back-patched fix, but after looking around I think that's probably
safe. External callers really shouldn't be using anything lower-level
than GetNewOid.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-04-11 14:53:28 Re: Creation of wiki page for open items of v11
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-04-11 14:41:38 Re: lazy detoasting