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

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Markus Wanner <markus.wanner@enterprisedb.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: API stability [was: pgsql: Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.]
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:45:59 +0200
Message-ID: <dcf25653867a82c96d8da9e43d1d7c2bc41cab09.camel@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZfJVkULPpNYN3a6i1RfBrijjhrF0=NZWHbbfqaQmnzpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E1nXTCX-001DGF-R0@gemulon.postgresql.org>
	<a7880f4d-1d74-582a-ada7-dad168d046d1@enterprisedb.com>
	<CA+TgmoaVwQj_nG-jPB8O=t8=h-QBoF2U+tKviv8BT8unfTEZiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<2358496.1649168259@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmoao-kUD9c5nG5sub3F7tbo39+cdr8jKaOVEs_1aBWcJ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<Yk94Hvnrx1V00skb@paquier.xyz>
	<a3c59975234c19eff08cb3b53dcd52ce32bf88d1.camel@enterprisedb.com>
	<CA+TgmobNoa83BmkmLaQDVn=HVs62zsHk+9tZCsxF17a=fV3RVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZfJVkULPpNYN3a6i1RfBrijjhrF0=NZWHbbfqaQmnzpQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2022-04-11 at 15:21 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> ... before v13, the commit in question actually
> changed the size of PGXACT, which is really quite bad -- it needs to
> be 12 bytes for performance reasons. And there's no spare bytes
> available, so I think we should follow one of the suggestions that he
> had over in that email thread, and put delayChkptEnd in PGPROC even
> though delayChkpt is in PGXACT.

This makes sense to me.  Kudos to Kyotaro for considering this.

At first read, this sounded like a trade-off between compatibility and
performance for PG 12 and older.  But I realize leaving delayChkpt in
PGXACT and adding just delayChkptEnd to PGPROC is compatible and leaves
PGXACT at a size of 12 bytes.  So this sounds like a good approach to
me.

Best Regards

Markus






view thread (23+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <dcf25653867a82c96d8da9e43d1d7c2bc41cab09.camel@enterprisedb.com>
Permalink:  ../dcf25653867a82c96d8da9e43d1d7c2bc41cab09.camel@enterprisedb.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/dcf25653867a82c96d8da9e43d1d7c2bc41cab09.camel@enterprisedb.com

 · 

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: markus.wanner@enterprisedb.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: API stability [was: pgsql: Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.]
  In-Reply-To: <dcf25653867a82c96d8da9e43d1d7c2bc41cab09.camel@enterprisedb.com>

* 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