On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> FYI, the repro case page contents looks like this with the patch applied:
>> postgres=# select lp, lp_flags, t_xmin, t_xmax, t_ctid,
>> to_hex(t_infomask) as infomask,
>> to_hex(t_infomask2) as infomask2
>> from heap_page_items(get_raw_page('t', 0));
>> lp | lp_flags | t_xmin | t_xmax | t_ctid | infomask | infomask2
>> ----+----------+---------+--------+--------+----------+-----------
>> 1 | 1 | 1845995 | 0 | (0,1) | b02 | 3
>> 2 | 2 | | | | |
>> 3 | 0 | | | | |
>> 4 | 0 | | | | |
>> 5 | 0 | | | | |
>> 6 | 0 | | | | |
>> 7 | 1 | 1846001 | 0 | (0,7) | 2b02 | 8003
>> (7 rows)
>
> Is lp_off for tid (0,2) pointing to (0,7)? A hot chain preserved is
> what would look correct to me.
Yes, it is:
postgres=# select * from bt_page_items('foo', 1);
itemoffset | ctid | itemlen | nulls | vars | data
------------+-------+---------+-------+------+-------------------------
1 | (0,1) | 16 | f | f | 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
2 | (0,2) | 16 | f | f | 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(2 rows)
I can tell from looking at my hex editor that the 4 bytes of ItemId
that we see for position '(0,2)' in the ItemId array are "07 00 01
00", meaning that '(0,2)' this is a LP_REDIRECT item, repointing us to
'(0,7)'. Everything here looks sane to me, at least at first blush.
> - * Check the tuple XMIN against prior XMAX, if any
> - */
> - if (TransactionIdIsValid(priorXmax) &&
> - !TransactionIdEquals(HeapTupleHeaderGetXmin(htup), priorXmax))
> - break;
> If you remove this check, you could also remove completely priorXmax.
>
> Actually, I may be missing something, but why is priorXmax updated
> even for dead tuples? For example just doing that is also taking care
> of the problem:
I'll study what you suggest here some more tomorrow.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
