Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny
Date: 2002-01-17 13:03:35
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA41EB4B7@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> > How do we know, that a (newly) FrozenXid tuple does not still have
> > a (visible) duplicate ?
>
> It's *not* visible, if you are applying any visibility checks whatever.
> But SnapshotAny bypasses all visibility checking.

I am concerned about the case where VACUUM FULL:
1. inserts heap tuple to new location using FrozenXid
2. updates original heap tuples's xmax

What if we crash/abort between step 1 and 2 but we used FrozenXid for 1.
Don't know if we actually do this, but imho we are only allowed
to use FrozenXid for an inplace vacuum operation.

Andreas

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vardan Gyurjyan 2002-01-17 13:04:26 jdbc:postgresql problem
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2002-01-17 12:59:16 Re: RC1 date?