Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1268263566.3825.2554.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > >>> Time to remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age, I think. > >> > >> Umm, so what's the bug? > > > Whether you call it a bug or just an annoyance is debatable, but the > > source of it is clear. > > Maybe to you, but the rest of us would like to know. If vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is set higher this causes the xmin to go backwards, leading to the "PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set" warning. Having this false xmin move backwards doesn't endanger the standby, since the xids arrive and are checked normally. If they stop arriving that is fine. Having the false xmin going backwards is not a serious issue on primary because the actual xmin does not go backwards. No observer loses information as a result of this, it is only about whether cleanup records are generated later than normal, or not. > > Given the lack of effectiveness, I propose > > removing it. > > I read Josh's recent report at > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4B973C3F.9070501@agliodbs.com > to say that it's quite effective. I think you're being way too hasty to > decide that it can just be dropped. OK, that's enough to not remove it. I was aware of more negative thoughts and conscious of my own feelings about it being a kluge. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: