Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>:

> Do you mean the race related to TransactionIdIsInProgress()? Not sure I
> understand, as you suggested above that you no longer need the function.

The "lightweight" approaches I see so far:
* XactLockTableWait before replay + SnapshotSelf(GetLatestSnapshot?)
* SnapshotDirty + retry logic
* SnapshotBelieveEverythingCommitted + modification of
HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate (because it called by heap_update and looks
into TransactionIdIsInProgress)

> It does not really worry me. The pg_squeeze extension is not MVCC-safe and I
> remember there were only 1 or 2 related complaints throughout its
> existence. (pg_repack isn't MVCC-safe as well, but I don't keep track of its
> issues.)

But pg_squeeze and pg_repack are extensions. If we are moving that
mechanics into core I'd expect some improvements over pg_squeeze.
MVCC-safety of REINDEX CONCURRENTLY makes it possible to run it on a
regular basis as some kind of background job. It would be nice to have
something like this for the heap.

I agree the initial approach is too invasive, complex and
performance-heavy to push it forward now.
But, any of "lightweight" feels like a good candidate to be shipped
with the feature itself - relatively easy and non-invasive.

Best regards,
Mikhail.