On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 5:26 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree on this that this system is easy to explain that we just
> rewrite anything that conflicts so looks more future-proof. Okay, I
> will try this solution and post the patch.
While working on this solution I noticed one issue. Basically, the
problem is that during binary upgrade when we try to rewrite a heap we
would expect that “binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid” and
“binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_relfilenumber” are already set for
creating a new heap. But we are not preserving anything so we don't
have those values. One option to this problem is that we can first
start the postmaster in non-binary upgrade mode perform all conflict
checking and rewrite and stop the postmaster. Then start postmaster
again and perform the restore as we are doing now. Although we will
have to start/stop the postmaster one extra time we have a solution.
But while thinking about this I started to think that since now we are
completely decoupling the concept of Oid and relfilenumber then
logically during REWRITE we should only be allocating new
relfilenumber but we don’t really need to allocate the Oid at all.
Yeah, we can do that if inside make_new_heap() if we pass the
OIDOldHeap to heap_create_with_catalog(), then it will just create new
storage(relfilenumber) but not a new Oid. But the problem is that the
ATRewriteTable() and finish_heap_swap() functions are completely based
on the relation cache. So now if we only create a new relfilenumber
but not a new Oid then we will have to change this infrastructure to
copy at smgr level.
Thoughts?
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com