Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15

From: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Evgeny Voropaev <evgeny(dot)voropaev(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15
Date: 2025-08-22 10:37:21
Message-ID: CACG=eza44ZoJRNei7T8xxYxX3v+QfzCJg7tuVqp+Y6mTa0oxUw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rebase @ 53eff471c69dc8b0c01

I revised parts of heap_convert.c's conversion from 32-bit to
64-bit pages.

Previously, we used a deferred full-page write to the converted pages
to reduce the impact on WAL. Leaving some converted pages in RAM
memory. This, however, may cause the incoming autovacuum (AV) to clean
transaction statuses for some pages depending on their XIDs. As a
result, we risk losing transaction statuses and encountering problems
like "could not open file pg_xact/...".

So I decided to abandon the delayed FPW of converted pages, as this
write is purely a one-time issue on the first read of the data after
the 64-bit upgrade.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 at 09:23, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> Rebase @ f5a987c0e5f6bbf0
> Main conflicts were:
> 62a17a9283 Integrate FullTransactionIds deeper into two-phase code
> 2633dae2e4 Standardize LSN formatting by zero padding
>
> Also, no setting XLOG_HEAP_INIT_PAGE on empty page as discussed above
> added.
>
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 at 12:49, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
> wrote:
> > Wow, it is really great bug.
> It's funny that no one has actually encountered this problem in all these
> years. It must
> be a very rare mix of circumstances, I think.
>
> Thank you very much, everyone, for participating!
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Maxim Orlov.
>

--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v66.zip application/zip 250.9 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2025-08-22 10:50:41 Re: [BUG?] check_exclusion_or_unique_constraint false negative
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2025-08-22 10:36:29 Re: A few patches to clarify snapshot management