Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobWsGCmgaPTvG2WnFqncoqv5+Dr8sR_xC63uVf0D7Wwgg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed, that's better. Attached updated patch.
> Also I've added this to the next CF so as not to forget.

Committed and back-patched.  While I'm fairly sure this is a correct
fix, post-commit review from someone who knows GIN better than I do
would be a great idea.

I am also clear on what the consequences of this bug are.  It seems
like it could harm insert performance by making us wait when we
shouldn't, but can it cause corruption?  That I'm not sure about.  If
there's already a cleanup of the pending list in progress, how do
things go wrong?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Inlining functions with "expensive" parameters
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted