Re: GiST VACUUM - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: GiST VACUUM
Date
Msg-id f36887ce-b7fe-4957-3df6-f79507ed0917@iki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to GiST VACUUM  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
Looking at the second patch, to scan the GiST index in physical order, 
that seems totally unsafe, if there are any concurrent page splits. In 
the logical scan, pushStackIfSplited() deals with that, by comparing the 
page's NSN with the parent's LSN. But I don't see anything like that in 
the physical scan code.

I think we can do something similar in the physical scan: remember the 
current LSN position at the beginning of the vacuum, and compare with 
that. The B-tree code uses the "cycle ID" for similar purposes.

Do we still need the separate gistvacuumcleanup() pass, if we scan the 
index in physical order in the bulkdelete pass already?

- Heikki


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST VACUUM
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: function lca('{}'::ltree[]) caused DB Instance crash