| From: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
| Cc: | shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com>, Radim Marek <radim(at)boringsql(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) can't complete after ~105M concurrent updates/deletes |
| Date: | 2026-10-06 19:29:18 |
| Message-ID: | 93720.1791314958@localhost |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> wrote:
> Actually, after going over Thom Brown's report on MVCC unsafety, I
> looked again and decided to move the <warning> box and the list of
> restrictions for CONCURRENTLY to also appear in the "Notes on Concurrent
> Operation" subsection, instead of inside the "Parameters" section.
> So here it is again, both in patch form as well as HTML.
[ Thanks for the HTML. ]
I suspect there's a thinko in the "Notes on Resources" section. Shouldn't the
first paragraph start like this?
"When the USING INDEX clause is given and an index scan is chosen, ..."
No objections regarding the "Notes on Concurrent Operation" section.
--
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2026-10-06 19:37:44 | Re: use a non-locking initial test in TAS_SPIN on AArch64 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-10-06 19:15:50 | Re: [PG19] eager aggregation gives wrong results because of bpchar_ops |