Re: old_snapshot_threshold's interaction with hash index

From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: old_snapshot_threshold's interaction with hash index
Date: 2016-05-02 21:02:35
Message-ID: CACjxUsOEoqTF7SsTAozW0Y6qRX7HhiCQ=na5tVfeCnsmNcRR_A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Currently we do the test for old snapshot (TestForOldSnapshot) for hash
>> indexes while scanning them. Does this test makes any sense for hash
>> indexes considering LSN on hash index will always be zero (as hash indexes
>> are not WAL-logged)? It seems to me that PageLSN check in
>> TestForOldSnapshot() will always return false which means that the error
>> "snapshot too old" won't be generated for hash indexes.
>>
>> Am I missing something here, if not, then I think we need a way to
>> prohibit pruning for hash indexes based on old_snapshot_threshold?
>
> What I mean to say here is prohibit pruning the relation which has hash
> index based on old_snapshot_threshold.

Good spot; added to the open issues page.

Thanks!

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-05-02 21:09:48 Re: pgsql: Fix assorted inconsistencies in GIN opclass support function dec
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2016-05-02 20:50:36 Re: snapshot too old, configured by time