Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression
Date
Msg-id 3625699.1674882143@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Reading Andres's comments and realising how relatively young
> txid_status() is compared to txid_current(), I'm now wondering if we
> shouldn't just disclaim the whole thing in back branches.

My thoughts were trending in that direction too.  It's starting
to sound like we aren't going to be able to make a fix that
we'd be willing to risk back-patching, even if it were completely
compatible at the user level.

Still, the idea that txid_status() isn't trustworthy is rather
scary.  I wonder whether there is a failure mode here that's
exhibitable without using that.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: lockup in parallel hash join on dikkop (freebsd 14.0-current)