| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipkumarb(at)google(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: VACUUM should ignore (CREATE |RE)INDEX CONCURRENTLY for xmin horizon calculations |
| Date: | 2025-11-24 22:09:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmfvbXa6aEdzEBSZK4mWM-XKdmt8_YaSXF96qvKU4OUFQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 4:18 PM Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> wrote:
> When VACUUM decides which rows are safe to freeze or permanently
> remove it currently ignores backends which have PROC_IN_VACUUM or
> PROC_IN_LOGICAL_DECODING bits set.
>
> This patch adds PROC_IN_SAFE_IC to this set, so backends running
> CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY or REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and where the index
> is "simple" - i.e. not expression indexes or conditional indexes are
> involved - these would be ignored too.
Are you aware of commit d9d076222f5b? It was subsequently reverted by
commit e28bb885 because it led to subtle data corruption. Indexes had
wrong contents due to an unforeseen interaction with pruning.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-11-24 22:15:19 | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-11-24 22:00:41 | Re: warning on the current head |