Re: Pruning never visible changes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Pruning never visible changes
Date
Msg-id CAM-w4HPu=4MEO5WgNc2GHsrK0LokBPrY6UKy2mNT3wq2cx1Z_Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Pruning never visible changes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Pruning never visible changes
Re: Pruning never visible changes
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 16 Sept 2022 at 10:27, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > A user asked me whether we prune never visible changes, such as
> > BEGIN;
> > INSERT...
> > UPDATE.. (same row)
> > COMMIT;
>
> Didn't we just have this discussion in another thread?

Well.....  not "just" :)

commit 44e4bbf75d56e643b6afefd5cdcffccb68cce414
Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date:   Fri Apr 29 16:29:42 2011 -0400

    Remove special case for xmin == xmax in HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum().

    VACUUM was willing to remove a committed-dead tuple immediately if it was
    deleted by the same transaction that inserted it.  The idea is that such a
    tuple could never have been visible to any other transaction, so we don't
    need to keep it around to satisfy MVCC snapshots.  However, there was
    already an exception for tuples that are part of an update chain, and this
    exception created a problem: we might remove TOAST tuples (which are never
    part of an update chain) while their parent tuple stayed around (if it was
    part of an update chain).  This didn't pose a problem for most things,
    since the parent tuple is indeed dead: no snapshot will ever consider it
    visible.  But MVCC-safe CLUSTER had a problem, since it will try to copy
    RECENTLY_DEAD tuples to the new table.  It then has to copy their TOAST
    data too, and would fail if VACUUM had already removed the toast tuples.

    Easiest fix is to get rid of the special case for xmin == xmax.  This may
    delay reclaiming dead space for a little bit in some cases, but it's by far
    the most reliable way to fix the issue.

    Per bug #5998 from Mark Reid.  Back-patch to 8.3, which is the oldest
    version with MVCC-safe CLUSTER.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Anton A. Melnikov"
Date:
Subject: Re: May be BUG. Periodic burst growth of the checkpoint_req counter on replica.
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names