Re: foreign key locks

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Here's version 24.

Old review emails still contains some items that didn't lead to any
changes. I tried to keep close track of those. To that list I add a
couple of things of my own. Here they are, for those following along.
I welcome suggestions.

- Fix the multixact cache in multixact.c -- see mXactCacheEnt.

- ResetHintBitMulti() was removed; need to remove old XMAX_IS_MULTI
somewhere; perhaps during HOT page pruning?

- EvalPlanQual and ExecLockRows maybe need a different overall locking
strategy. Right now follow_updates=false is used to avoid deadlocks.

- Ensure multixact.c behaves sanely on wraparound.

- Is the case of a a non-key-update followed by a key-update actually handled
when doing a heap_lock_tuple with mode = LockTupleKeyShare and follow_updates
= false? I don't really see how, so it seems to deserve at least a comment.

- if oldestMultiXactId + db is set and then that database is dropped we seem to
have a problem because MultiXactAdvanceOldest won't overwrite those
values. Should probably use SetMultiXactIdLimit directly.

- what stop multixacts only being filled out (i.e RecordNewMultiXact()) *after*
the XLogInsert() *and* after a MultiXactGetCheckptMulti()? Afaics
MultiXactGenLock is not hold in CreateMultiXactId(). If we crash in that
moment we loose the multixact data which now means potential data loss...

- multixact member group data crossing 512 sector boundaries makes me uneasy
(as its 5 bytes). I don't really see a scenario where its dangerous, but
... Does anybody see a problem here?

- there are quite some places that do
multiStopLimit = multiWrapLimit - 100;
if (multiStopLimit < FirstMultiXactId)
multiStopLimit -= FirstMultiXactId;

perhaps MultiXactIdAdvance and MultiXactIdRetreat macros are in order?

- not really padding, MultiXactStatus is 4bytes...
/*
* XXX Note: there's a lot of padding space in MultiXactMember. We could
* find a more compact representation of this Xlog record -- perhaps all the
* status flags in one XLogRecData, then all the xids in another one? Not
* clear that it's worth the trouble though.
*/

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services