Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmobfgjui4HiK8VDGYP_73WktWEr844TA3YyJomvYb3fs0A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 1:14 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I still think we need a way to test this without waiting for hours to
> hit various edge cases. You argued against a fixed binning of
> old_snapshot_threshold/100 arguing its too coarse. How about a 1000 or
> so? For 60 days, the current max for old_snapshot_threshold, that'd be a
> granularity of 01:26:24, which seems fine.  The best way I can think of
> that'd keep current GUC values sensible is to change
> old_snapshot_threshold to be float. Ugly, but ...?

Yeah, 1000 would be a lot better. However, if we switch to a fixed
number of bins, it's going to be a lot more code churn. What did you
think of my suggestion of making head_timestamp artificially move
backward to simulate the passage of time?

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Race condition in SyncRepGetSyncStandbysPriority
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: fixing old_snapshot_threshold's time->xid mapping