Hello everyone! Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org>: > Please note that Antonin already implemented this. See his patches > here: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/77690.1725610115%40antos > I proposed to leave this part out initially, which is why it hasn't been > reposted. We can review and discuss after the initial patches are in.
I think it is worth pushing it at least in the same release cycle.
> But you're welcome to review that part specifically if you're so
> inclined, and offer feedback on it. (I suggest to rewind back your
> checked-out tree to branch master at the time that patch was posted, for
> easy application. We can deal with a rebase later.)
I have rebased that on top of v18 (attached).
Also, I think I found an issue (or lost something during rebase): we
must preserve xmin,cmin during initial copy
to make sure that data is going to be visible by snapshots of
concurrent changes later:
static void
reform_and_rewrite_tuple(......)
.....
/*It is also crucial to stamp the new record with the exact same
xid and cid,
* because the tuple must be visible to the snapshot of the
applied concurrent
* change later.
*/
CommandId cid = HeapTupleHeaderGetRawCommandId(tuple->t_data);
TransactionId xid = HeapTupleHeaderGetXmin(tuple->t_data);
heap_insert(NewHeap, copiedTuple, xid, cid, HEAP_INSERT_NO_LOGICAL, NULL);
I'll try to polish that part a little bit.
> Because having an MVCC-safe mode has drawbacks, IMO we should make it
> optional.
Do you mean some option for the command? Like REPACK (CONCURRENTLY, SAFE)?
Best regards,
Mikhail.
v18-0006-Preserve-visibility-information-of-the-concurren.patch
Description: Binary data
