pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Rui Zhao <zhaorui126@gmail.com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Burd <greg@burd.me>
Cc: Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Support for 8-byte TOAST values, round two
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 08:30:43 +0900
Message-ID: <aqSPIxSTkgb3GTOQ@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHWVJhGkb1n_QSS4M=PKJD5HHcwK3KXpFwVxoRVLzAG3j+2fhQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALj2ACWTM=VgjDU=2BBuYAh2Ae8Kq5NspJZsmhiAvNQkXZ=MjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<aqCvLyFwAwviycfu@paquier.xyz>
	<4272005a-ca62-46be-aab3-8678187d84cd@app.fastmail.com>
	<e971c02b-3472-4f94-9259-a0c70675206e@app.fastmail.com>
	<aqHpYL-ytLbT3jGR@paquier.xyz>
	<aqJhmsEEiAUKQFXN@paquier.xyz>
	<CALj2ACWEY0HHREE5Dn9Waa33coj-SwxPRkEtW4A=nCSzN8UrAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACVG9cjxr-0jb8PP_Vb7vJvVGBVM_fQ2srt4CpyURpfYhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<aqOu0TEpCM_oPksP@paquier.xyz>
	<CAHWVJhGkb1n_QSS4M=PKJD5HHcwK3KXpFwVxoRVLzAG3j+2fhQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Sep 12, 2026 at 01:38:06AM +0800, Rui Zhao wrote:
> v17 applies to master (6a1c1102c4), builds warning-free, and make
> check-world passes here.  Three small patches attached: 0001 applies to
> master, 0002 and 0003 on top of 0005.

Thanks for looking and testing.

0001 and 0002 sound like good ideas in terms of coverage, why not, but
I don't really buy the benefit offered by 0003 (see below for reason).

> Rare case: pg_control lost, cluster brought back with pg_resetwal -f as
> documented, the OID counter comes back as the guess, 10000.  On a fresh
> cluster with 1000 values in an oid8 table (chunk_ids 16394 to 17393) and
> 1000 in an oid table, the oid table takes new rows as before and inserts
> into the oid8 table fail with

If you have "lost" a control file, an oid8 value in the past is the
least of your worries.  At least this can be safely be set: just move
it to something like (UINT64_MAX / N) and you should be good enough, N
being a natural integer of your choice.  I still don't buy that adding
a re-check of the value in the TOAST insert path is worth the cost of
this case.
--
Michael

Attachments:

  signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download

view thread (72+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <aqSPIxSTkgb3GTOQ@paquier.xyz>
Permalink:  ../aqSPIxSTkgb3GTOQ@paquier.xyz/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/aqSPIxSTkgb3GTOQ@paquier.xyz

 · 

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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, zhaorui126@gmail.com, bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com, greg@burd.me, nagata@sraoss.co.jp, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: Support for 8-byte TOAST values, round two
  In-Reply-To: <aqSPIxSTkgb3GTOQ@paquier.xyz>

* 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