| From: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in autovacuum.c? |
| Date: | 2011-04-01 21:59:40 |
| Message-ID: | D9F4A89E-4EB2-4B4C-B0A4-E9E2144BDC22@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Apr 1, 2011, at 4:48 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am not so concerned about this case but about other cases where we are
> computing xid distances across the invalid range.
Bruce, I think you hit the nail on the head earlier:
> To do the right thing every computation that passes over the xid
> wraparound bounary should subtract FirstNormalTransactionId, not just
> those that fall in the boundry.
Put another way: XID calculations should not use just +/-, but an operator (presumably a macro) that understands wraparound and the special values. Surely we have a similar problem in the code that increments XIDs, and possibly other places as well.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2011-04-01 22:15:55 | Re: Lock problem with autovacuum truncating heap |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-04-01 21:52:49 | Re: Bug in autovacuum.c? |