On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:23 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> 2. Doesn't the code that sets MultiXactState->multiVacLimit also need
>>> to use what I'm now calling MultiXactMemberFreezeThreshold() - or some
>>> similar logic? Otherwise, a user with autovacuum=off won't get
>>> emergency autovacuums for member exhaustion, even though they will get
>>> them for offset exhaustion.
>>
>> Yeah, it looks like it does.
>
> OK, I'm not clear how to do that correctly, exactly, but hopefully one
> of us can figure that out.
MultiXactState->multiVacLimit holds the multixact IDs at which an age
thresholds will be crossed, so that GetNewMultiXactId can check it
cheaply. But we can't predict the future multixact IDs at which our
member usage threshold will be crossed. We could try to estimate it
based on past multixact sizes, but (as I think we already covered
somewhere else) we shouldn't be trying to do that because it wouldn't
handle the situation where your member space consumption rate suddenly
went up, among other problems.
How about this: we add oldestOffset to MultiXactState, to be set by
DetermineSafeOldestOffset, and then at the place where
GetNewMultiXactId checks if (!MultiXactIdPrecedes(result,
MultiXactState->multiVacLimit) it could also check whether (nextOffset
- MultiXactState->oldestOffset > MULTIXACT_MEMBER_SAFE_THRESHOLD).
ReadMultiXactCounts should also use the oldestOffset value directly
from shmem instead of calling find_multixact_start.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
