From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Remove remnants of "snapshot too old" |
Date: | 2024-12-04 16:35:58 |
Message-ID: | Z1CE7pO3Lkrhqdhk@nathan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 09:55:43AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 04/12/2024 03:24, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> > Most of this I agree with. But I'm not sure just removing the toast snapshot
>> > stuff is good - we've had a bunch of bugs where we don't hold a snapshot for
>> > long enough to actually ensure that toast tuples stay alive.
>>
>> Yeah, the stuff concerned with toast snapshots has nothing to do
>> with that old user-visible feature. It's to keep us from writing
>> incorrect code, and it's still (very) needed.
>
> Right. Here's a new attempt that keeps that check.
Looks reasonable to me. One idea I had is to make SnapshotToast a macro
that first does an AssertMacro(HaveRegisteredOrActiveSnapshot()), but the
approach in the patch seems fine, too.
--
nathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-12-04 16:43:31 | Re: checksum verification code breaks backups in v16- |
Previous Message | Jim Jones | 2024-12-04 16:18:54 | XMLDocument (SQL/XML X030) |