| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | levertond(at)googlemail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #10533: 9.4 beta1 assertion failure in autovacuum process |
| Date: | 2014-06-09 13:04:06 |
| Message-ID: | 5395B0C6.2070000@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 06/09/2014 03:46 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> >I haven't thought particularly much about this, but I don't really see
>> >why the heap_page_is_all_visible() bit needs to be in a critical
>> >section? Can't we just do that entire bit after the log_heap_clean()?
>> >Then the heap_page_is_all_visible() can be done outside a critical
>> >section.
> Before I start working on a patch along those lines, do you see any
> problems with making the critical section smaller?
One subtle difference is that the PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag will not be
included in the full-page-image that log_heap_page() might take. But
that seems OK. visibilitymap_set() writes a WAL record that sets it at
replay.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jlrando | 2014-06-09 14:10:03 | Re: Hot standby 9.2.6 -> 9.2.6 PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-06-09 12:46:16 | Re: BUG #10533: 9.4 beta1 assertion failure in autovacuum process |