On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> After heap truncation using this algorithm, shared buffers may contain
> past-OEF buffers. But those buffers are empty (no used items) and
> clean. So, real-only queries shouldn't hint those buffers dirty
> because there are no used items. Normally, these buffers will be just
> evicted away from the shared buffer arena. If relation extension will
> happen short after heap truncation then some of those buffers could be
> found after relation extension. I think this situation could be
> handled. For instance, we can teach vacuum to claim page as new once
> all the tuples were gone.
I think this all sounds pretty dangerous and fragile, especially in
view of the pluggable storage work. If we start to add new storage
formats, deductions based on the specifics of the current heap's
hint-bit behavior may turn out not to be valid. Now maybe you could
speculate that it won't matter because perhaps truncation will work
differently in other storage formats too, but it doesn't sound to me
like we'd be wise to bet on it working out that way.
IIRC, Andres had some patches revising shared buffer management that
allowed the ending block number to be maintained in shared memory.
I'm waving my hands here, but with that kind of a system you can
imagine that maybe there could also be a flag bit indicating whether a
truncation is in progress. So, reduce the number of page and set the
bit; then zap all the pages above that value that are still present in
shared_buffers; then clear the bit. Or maybe we don't even need the
bit, but I think we do need some kind of race-free mechanism to make
sure that we never try to read pages that either have been truncated
away or in the process of being truncated away.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company