| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, cca5507 <cca5507(at)qq(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Handle concurrent drop when doing whole database vacuum |
| Date: | 2026-06-30 15:30:25 |
| Message-ID: | akPhEffRipH4isWF@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 01:47:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Something that still feels off to me is to blindly use _ext() in
> vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation(), where we *may* already hold a lock
> on the relation whose ACL is checked. In this case missing a relation
> is not fine, so this would make the code more brittle in the
> single-relation case under autovacuum or a VACUUM with a list of
> relations provided by a user.
Yeah, so we should only use it for get_all_vacuum_rels(), as in the
attached.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v8-0001-handle-concurrent-drop-in-database-wide-vacuum.patch | text/plain | 3.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2026-06-30 15:55:03 | Re: use of SPI by postgresImportForeignStatistics |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-06-30 15:25:13 | Re: occasional ECPG failures on dikkop (FreeBSD) |