Re: RFC: Making TRUNCATE more "MVCC-safe"

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 14:53, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Noah for drawing attention to this thread. I hadn't been
>>>> watching. As you say, this work would allow me to freeze rows at load
>>>> time and avoid the overhead of hint bit setting, which avoids
>>>> performance issues from hint bit setting in checksum patch.
>>>>
>>>> I've reviewed this patch and it seems OK to me. Good work Marti.
>
> ...
>
>> v3 attached.
>
> More detailed thoughts show that the test in heap_beginscan_internal()
> is not right enough, i.e. wrong.
>
> We need a specific XidInMVCCSnapshot test on the relvalidxid, so it
> needs to be a specific xid, not an xmin because otherwise we can get
> concurrent transactions failing, not just older transactions.

Marti, please review this latest version which has new isolation tests added.

This does both TRUNCATE and CREATE TABLE.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services