Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums
Date
Msg-id 4502.1227553421@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> So if it's possible for the frozenxid in the visibility map to go backwards
> then it's no good, since if that update is lost we might skip a necessary
> vacuum freeze.

Seems like a lost disk write would be enough to make that happen.

Now you might argue that the odds of that are no worse than the odds of
losing an update to one particular heap page, but in this case the
single hiccup could lead to losing half a gigabyte of data (assuming 8K
page size).  The leverage you get for saving vacuum freeze work is
exactly equal to the magnification factor for data loss.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Snapshot warning
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3