| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Relation cache invalidation on replica |
| Date: | 2016-02-27 01:23:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20160227012318.fnjtmtg5q5qvllqk@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-02-27 01:16:34 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> If the above is true, then the proposed fix wouldn't work either.
>
> No point in sending a cache invalidation message on the standby if you
> haven't also written WAL, since the catalog re-read would just see the old
> row.
>
> heap_inplace_update() does write WAL, which blows away the starting premise.
I'm not following here. heap_inplace_update() indeed writes WAL, but it
does *NOT* (and may not) assign an xid. Thus we're not emitting the
relcache invalidation queued in DefineIndex(), as
RecordTransactionCommit() currently skips emitting a commit record if
there's no xid.
> So I'm not seeing this as an extant bug in an open source version of
> PostgreSQL, in my current understanding.
But the first message in the thread demonstrated a reproducible problem?
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2016-02-27 01:45:57 | Re: Relation cache invalidation on replica |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2016-02-27 01:16:34 | Re: Relation cache invalidation on replica |