Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica/ proof of concept - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica/ proof of concept
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobmA9VJOKQO1UuKurX7TPjVxFkYNAZPd8F2OOQ1kZS30A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica/ proof of concept  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica/ proof of concept  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:38 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> The aspect I'm more concerned here about is whether we miss ability
> for detecting some of IO errors, if we don't distinguish new pages
> from pages whose tuples were removed by vacuum.

My main concern is correctness.  If we ever have valid-looking buffers
in shared_buffers after the corresponding data has been truncated away
on disk, we've got to make sure that nobody ever confuses one of them
with an actually-valid buffer.  Reading over your algorithm, I can't
convince myself that you have that case nailed down tightly enough.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Why hash OIDs?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: typcache.c typos