Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits
| От | Ashutosh Bapat |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAExHW5t6Qjw42V1-XuL22bkZ3YvMPfZn8vgDw3ED7VpcjOcTfQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
| Ответы |
Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 12:49 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: > > On 09/12/2025 14:00, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > 1. Currently, at multixid wraparound, MultiXactState->nextMXact goes to > > 0, which is invalid. All the readers must be prepared for that, and skip > > over the 0. That's error-prone, we've already missed that a few times. > > Let's change things so that the code that *writes* MultiXactState- > > >nextMXact skips over the zero already. > > Here's a patch for that. Does anyone see a problem with this? The patch looks fine to me. It simplifies readers without affecting writers much. I was expecting more explanation of why it wasn't done that way to start with and why is it safe to do so (now, if applicable). There must be a reason why we chose to make readers handle invalid mxid instead of writers writing one. If it's for performance reasons then does the new arrangement cause any regression? If it's for safety reasons, are we fixing one set of problems but introducing a new set. I was expecting commit message to answer those questions. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: