Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X9GKy-0008Ml-2o for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:21:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X9GKx-0002TX-AJ for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:21:15 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X9GKt-0002Lk-W4 for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:21:12 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X9GKp-0002Ph-QX for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:21:09 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s6LGKuF1003656; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:20:56 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: Bruce Momjian , Alvaro Herrera , PostgreSQL Bugs Subject: Re: pg_upgrade < 9.3 -> >=9.3 misses a step around multixacts In-reply-to: <20140721161222.GA17049@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <20140720223010.GF5974@alap3.anarazel.de> <17935.1405895946@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140720225653.GG5974@alap3.anarazel.de> <18673.1405897470@sss.pgh.pa.us> <18851.1405897900@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140720233125.GI5974@alap3.anarazel.de> <19458.1405899435@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140720234925.GJ5974@alap3.anarazel.de> <22178.1405903964@sss.pgh.pa.us> <26504.1405912770@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140721161222.GA17049@alap3.anarazel.de> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:12:22 +0200" Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:20:56 -0400 Message-ID: <3655.1405959656@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-bugs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-bugs-owner@postgresql.org Andres Freund writes: > 1) How about adding a elog(WARNING, "relation %u has invalid freeze > limits", ...) to vac_update_datfrozenxid()? Otherwise it's a bit hard > to understand what's going on. I wouldn't want to invest too much effort > into the precision of the message, but some log bleat seems justified. I considered that but wasn't really convinced it was a good idea. You'd be getting a lot of log spam on a 9.3 installation that had been affected by the pg_upgrade bug, until all the tables got cleaned up (and we're intentionally not forcing that to happen quickly). Anybody else have an opinion? > 2) From a pedantic POV lastSane* should be initialized to > ReadNewTransactionId()/ReadNextMultiXactId(). On a busy system we could > otherwise consider concurrently updated values as being too new if some > longrunning transaction finishes. Also GetOldestXmin() can sometimes go > backwards... If it's wrong then that's a pre-existing bug, but I don't think it's wrong. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs