Re: visibility map corruption

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: visibility map corruption
Date: 2021-07-24 01:01:18
Message-ID: 20210724010118.GE8025@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 05:47:18PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > I could perhaps see corruption happening if pg_control's oldest xid
> > value was closer to the current xid value than it should be, but I can't
> > see how having it 2-billion away could cause harm, unless perhaps
> > pg_upgrade itself used enough xids to cause the counter to wrap more
> > than 2^31 away from the oldest xid recorded in pg_control.
> >
> > What I am basically asking is how to document this and what it fixes.
>
> ISTM that this is a little like commits 78db307bb2 and a61daa14. Maybe
> take a look at those?

Agreed. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing an important aspect
of this patch. Thanks.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-07-24 01:02:29 Re: Followup Timestamp to timestamp with TZ conversion
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-07-24 00:47:18 Re: visibility map corruption