| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> | 
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Allow cancelling VACUUM of nbtrees with corrupted right links | 
| Date: | 2018-06-27 20:11:15 | 
| Message-ID: | 20180627201115.o7oof7svijnqzcas@alap3.anarazel.de | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On 2018-06-27 13:02:25 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > A related question is if it matters - without complicating the code I
> > don't see how we could release all the locks in that loop. Therefore no
> > interrupts can be accepted.  I hope I'm missing something?
> 
> I agree.
> 
> In general, page deletion is the most complicated part of nbtree
> concurrency, by far (if we just had the basic L&Y, the concurrency
> aspects would be far easier to grasp). Doing better in
> _bt_unlink_halfdead_page() seems extremely difficult, and very
> unlikely to be worthwhile.
Well, I don't really want to generally do better. Just be able to check
for interrupts ;)
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-06-27 20:12:19 | Re: Allow cancelling VACUUM of nbtrees with corrupted right links | 
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2018-06-27 20:10:51 | Re: adding tab completions |