| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New strategies for freezing, advancing relfrozenxid early |
| Date: | 2022-12-22 00:30:28 |
| Message-ID: | a15cd7f9ca70a35b61faa38eccea9a7d41bdb3c2.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2022-12-20 at 21:26 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> When freeze_required is set to true, that means that lazy_scan_prune
> literally has no choice -- it simply must freeze the page as
> instructed by heap_prepare_freeze_tuple/FreezeMultiXactId. It's not
> just a strong suggestion -- it's crucial that lazy_scan_prune freezes
> the page as instructed.
The confusing thing to me is perhaps just the name -- to me,
"freeze_required" suggests that if it were set to true, it would cause
freezing to happen. But as far as I can tell, it does not cause
freezing to happen, it causes some other things to happen that are
necessary when freezing happens (updating and using the right
trackers).
A minor point, no need to take action here. Perhaps rename the
variable.
I think 0001+0002 are about ready.
--
Jeff Davis
PostgreSQL Contributor Team - AWS
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2022-12-22 00:34:23 | Re: Add palloc_aligned() to allow arbitrary power of 2 memory alignment |
| Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2022-12-21 23:30:42 | Re: Avoid lost result of recursion (src/backend/optimizer/util/inherit.c) |