| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental patch for terminating VACUUM freeze blockers |
| Date: | 2026-05-13 14:23:26 |
| Message-ID: | agSJXgqhAhTRQdcI@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 07:56:43PM +0800, wenhui qiu wrote:
> I have an experimental patch to explore handling this situation. The patch
> adds a GUC, vacuum_freeze_terminate_blockers_pid, which allows VACUUM to
> terminate regular client backends whose transaction horizon blocks VACUUM
> from advancing its freeze cutoff. The intended targets are
> idle-in-transaction sessions and long-running active transactions that are
> holding an old xmin or assigned XID.
Thanks for sharing. I certainly agree that this area has room for
improvement in Postgres.
> The patch deliberately does not try to handle other causes of freeze
> horizon retention, such as replication slots, hot standby feedback, or
> prepared transactions.
My experience is a bit dated, but I remember the two main issues being
replication slots and temporary tables. We now have
idle_replication_slot_timeout, and there's a somewhat active thread on an
XID version of that parameter [0], but I'm not aware of any recent ideas
about how to deal with stranded temporary tables. I'd encourage you to
think about these problems, too.
[0] https://postgr.es/m/CA%2B-JvFsMHckBMzsu5Ov9HCG3AFbMh056hHy1FiXazBRtZ9pFBg%40mail.gmail.com
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavlo Golub | 2026-05-13 14:38:20 | [PATCH v4] pg_stat_statements: Add last_execution_start column |
| Previous Message | Junwang Zhao | 2026-05-13 14:20:01 | Re: [SQL/PGQ] Early pruning for GRAPH_TABLE path generation |