public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Maxim Orlov <[email protected]>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: wenhui qiu <[email protected]>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Postgres hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 20:09:56 +0300
Message-ID: <CACG=ezbKwypBp=14q9+hMQApus3=1hKxJ9x1+KinUhtT48570Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CACG=ezaWg7_nt-8ey4aKv2w9LcuLthHknwCawmBgEeTnJrJTcw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPpHfduczcop9s6gKUpLGgFUe2y4ERGMJx6SS6Kp+s-kQPwMjg@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezbye4g_ERNqE=gBcvQ0YypRaVENhNUu8xrs4PL12UdnUA@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezaMncd0-BcGHBgsSR2eqHfrz9WznHGLKX8biz6zu-azGw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CACG=ezb9XTvd3ZmS0y8gUunx_wBBdJO7ou+BfCOnnA5jE-11vg@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezYFNqGjsxF6Vb2CHF6JzKcjhAFauaFm9js0nu_3Ngcdkw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGjGUA+dcV7veaCV1H65vCNsbS++nT8=ho772gDvsXUW9H7eXQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezYThNkf8QsDA-aQfEFEkqn2L=_uUL83z0vJstPRasbZqg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CACG=ezYtCatcRODS-ZkwhcxuqBKCuhEsZGBruw=dGCLoepF+ZA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CACG=ezb680eb=JXh1ns=t5eGH3h9y-uTfT4tf3Xc8t2UH2q6tQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezZGQFBb0yepka8hU2BmJ48ujt3xa+aYLNL0BQPx0vqwZg@mail.gmail.com>
<CACG=ezajc_Pcqmy6fcq-N8+LzCRMzOzJzez2_BgHEu-6RVJtKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 at 13:21, Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Attached is some more cleanup on top of patch set v9, removing more dead
> stuff related to wraparound. I also removed the oldestOffsetKnown
> variable and related code. It was needed to deal with clusters upgraded
> from buggy 9.3 and 9.4 era versions, but now that pg_upgrade will
> rewrite the SLRUs, it's no longer needed.
>
Yep, multixact.c looks correct to me. As for "XXX could use
SimpleLruTruncate()", yes, for sure.
Actually, xl_multixact_truncate.startTruncMemb is also no longer needed, is
it?
> Does the pg_upgrade code work though, if you have that buggy situation
> where oldestOffsetKnown == false ?
>
> >
> > if (!TransactionIdIsValid(*xactptr))
> > {
> > /* Corner case 3: we must be looking at unused
> slot zero */
> > Assert(offset == 0);
> > continue;
> > }
>
> After upgrade, this corner case 3 would *not* happen on offset == 0. So
> looks like we're still missing test coverage for this upgrade corner case.
>
Am I understanding correctly that you want to have a test corresponding to
the buggy 9.3 and 9.4 era versions?
Do you think we could imitate this scenario on a current master branch like
that:
1) generate a couple of offsets segments for the first table;
2) generate more segments for a second table;
3) drop first table;
4) stop pg cluster;
5) remove pg_multixact/offsets/0000
6) upgrade?
PFA, v10-0016-TEST-try-to-replicate-buggy-oldest-offset.patch
This test will fail now, for an obvious reason, but is this case a relevant
one?
--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.
Attachments:
[application/zip] v10-64-bit-mxoff.zip (51.3K, 3-v10-64-bit-mxoff.zip)
download
view thread (5+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits
In-Reply-To: <CACG=ezbKwypBp=14q9+hMQApus3=1hKxJ9x1+KinUhtT48570Q@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox