Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
Date: 2026-04-08 03:49:04
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KWDbBk4FgbbWdivQLrPPzR4zgvfnHK4WjWC78rbuRVbg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 7, 2026 at 7:49 PM Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>
> Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > 02. SnapBuildProcessRunningXacts
> >
> > Per my understanding, the db_specic snapshot can be also serialized. Is it
> > possibility tha normal logical decoding system restores the snapshot and obtain
> > the wrong result?
>
> I don't think that the database-specific xl_running_xacts WAL record affects
> what SnapBuildSerialize() writes to disk: the contents of builder->committed,
> etc. is updated by decoding COMMIT and ABORT records.
>

I think the point is that the other process say a walsender could
restore such a snapshot making it take the wrong decision.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2026-04-08 03:49:26 Re: Better shared data structure management and resizable shared data structures
Previous Message vignesh C 2026-04-08 03:45:22 Re: Logical Replication - revisit `is_table_publication` function implementation