| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pg 15 devel crashes when fetching data from table using cursor |
| Date: | 2022-03-11 02:10:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20220311021047.hgtqkrl6n52srvdu@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hi,
On 2022-03-10 21:05:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > Another example of complete brokenness in the wider area is catalog accesses
> > happening after PROC_IN_VACUUM is set. Afaict it's entirely incorrect to do
> > any catalog accesses once set, because rows that are still needed for the
> > catalog access can just be removed.
>
> That seems like a fairly untenable design rule. Maybe we should rethink
> what PROC_IN_VACUUM means/is used for.
Isn't it something fairly fundamental? The goal of PROC_IN_VACUUM is to
prevent vacuum from holding up the "horizon" so other vacuums can remove rows
that have become dead after a long vacuum started.
I think we basically have to move the setting of PROC_IN_VACUUM to the last
moment, when we've done everything else, and then force a new snapshot to be
computed after.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-11 02:21:13 | Re: Pg 15 devel crashes when fetching data from table using cursor |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-11 02:05:37 | Re: Pg 15 devel crashes when fetching data from table using cursor |