Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access)

From: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access)
Date: 2026-09-24 03:09:05
Message-ID: DE133035-1B4B-4428-BA5E-E2CC0DD72F50@gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Sep 24, 2026, at 05:21, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 12:18 PM Melanie Plageman
> <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> I've tightened up the commit messages in the latest version and
>> changed 0002 as you suggested. I'll commit 0001-0003 after beta4 is
>> tagged tomorrow. 0004 I'm going to think about just a bit longer (and
>> would be master only).
>
> I've committed all but v2-0004. That turned out to have a bug where I
> updated the prune_xid to newest_live_xid even when there were dead
> items (because that code runs before we set all-visible to false due
> to dead items. Attached v3 fixes that and has a patch to replace
> foreach with foreach_int and foreach_node which David suggested a long
> time ago and I never got around to. 0001 targets master only, 0002
> targets 19 and master. I'll commit 0002 very shortly since it's so
> trivial.
>
> - Melanie
> <v3-0001-Retain-newest-live-xid-as-prune-hint-after-visibi.patch><v3-0002-Use-typed-foreach-macros-for-planner-relation-lis.patch>

I think I need time to understand 0001 though there are just a few lines added.

0002 looks good, making the code cleaner.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Manu 2026-09-24 03:08:04 Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) can silently lose updates when the toast table is rewritten