|From:||Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|To:||Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>|
|Subject:||Re: brin index vacuum versus transaction snapshots|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
> I think the real solution to this problem is to avoid use of
> GetTransactionSnapshot(), and instead use GetLatestSnapshot(). As far
> as I can see, that should completely close the hole. This requires
> patching IndexBuildHeapRangeScan() to allow for that.
Actually I think there's another problem: if a transaction starts and
inserts a tuple into the page range, then goes to sleep, and then
another session does the summarization of the page range, session 1 is
seen as "in progress" by session 2 (so the scan does not see the new
tuple), but the placeholder tuple was not modified either because it was
inserted later than the snapshot. So the update is lost.
I think the only way to close this hole is to have summarize_range()
sleep until all open snapshots are gone after inserting the placeholder
tuple and before acquiring the snapshot, similarly to how CREATE INDEX
CONCURRENTLY does it.
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
|Next Message||Alvaro Herrera||2015-07-31 20:00:12||Re: Doubt about AccessExclusiveLock in ALTER TABLE .. SET ( .. );|
|Previous Message||Paragon Corporation||2015-07-31 19:43:07||Use of PRId64 with PostgreSQL functions|