From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Alexandre Garcia <alexandre@vmfarms.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: postgresql 9.6 - cannot freeze committed xmax
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 18:32:08 -0300
Message-ID: <20180301213208.y7e4aflsklro4kpr@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180301174010.vqrjlps5stz6opzd@alvherre.pgsql>
I pushed my proposed fix all the way back to 9.3.
As I said earlier, I couldn't detect a bug of the sort you describe:
a) as I argued in my previous email, no tuple earlier than the
relfreezexid should survive, because 9.2 did remove those when
freezing the table.
b) One thing we could do but do not, is detect the case where there is
an Xmax that is newer than the cutoff_xid but comes from before the
pg_upgrade. We don't freeze it in that case. But we do return it as
totally_frozen=false, so it'll be frozen later anyway -- nothing bad
happens. I don't think this is worth tinkering with.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, andres@anarazel.de, alexandre@vmfarms.com
Subject: Re: postgresql 9.6 - cannot freeze committed xmax
In-Reply-To: <20180301213208.y7e4aflsklro4kpr@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox