Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> schrieb:
>Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> The VACUUM implementation in 9.3 had several bugs: It removed
>multixact
>> xmax values without regard of the importance of contained xids, it
>did
>> not remove multixacts if the contained xids were too old and it
>relied
>> on hint bits when checking whether a row needed to be frozen which
>might
>> not have been set on replicas.
>
>Uh ... what does the last have to do with it? Surely we don't run
>VACUUM on replicas. Or are you talking about what might happen when
>VACUUM is run on a former replica that's been promoted to master?
Unfortunately not. The problem is that xl_heap_freeze's redo function simply reexecutes heap-freeze-tuple() instead of
loggingmuch about each tuple...
Andres
--
Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone.
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
