Add.
This commit is contained in:
parent
1a02edae60
commit
8453208634
@ -919,3 +919,137 @@ Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
|
||||
PGP key available upon request, | /
|
||||
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/
|
||||
|
||||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M3501@postgresql.org Sat Jan 20 03:42:19 2001
|
||||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id DAA12652
|
||||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 03:42:18 -0500 (EST)
|
||||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f0K8ZG020426;
|
||||
Sat, 20 Jan 2001 03:35:16 -0500 (EST)
|
||||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M3501@postgresql.org)
|
||||
Received: from store.z.zembu.com (nat.zembu.com [209.128.96.253])
|
||||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0K8TU016385
|
||||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 03:29:30 -0500 (EST)
|
||||
(envelope-from ncm@zembu.com)
|
||||
Received: by store.z.zembu.com (Postfix, from userid 509)
|
||||
id B33D9A782; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 00:29:24 -0800 (PST)
|
||||
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 00:29:24 -0800
|
||||
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Transaction ID wraparound: problem and proposed solution
|
||||
Message-ID: <20010120002924.A2797@store.zembu.com>
|
||||
Reply-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||||
References: <8382.973291660@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200101200500.AAA05265@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
||||
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
||||
Content-Disposition: inline
|
||||
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
|
||||
In-Reply-To: <200101200500.AAA05265@candle.pha.pa.us>; from pgman@candle.pha.pa.us on Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 12:00:09AM -0500
|
||||
From: ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers)
|
||||
Precedence: bulk
|
||||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||
Status: OR
|
||||
|
||||
I think the XID wraparound matter might be handled a bit more simply.
|
||||
|
||||
Given a global variable X which is the earliest XID value in use at
|
||||
some event (e.g. startup) you can compare two XIDs x and y, using
|
||||
unsigned arithmetic, with just (x-X < y-X). This has the further
|
||||
advantage that old transaction IDs need be "frozen" only every 4G
|
||||
transactions, rather than Tom's suggested 256M or 512M transactions.
|
||||
"Freezing", in this scheme, means to set all older XIDs to equal the
|
||||
chosen X, rather than setting them to some constant reserved value.
|
||||
No special cases are required for the comparison, even for folded
|
||||
values; it is (x-X < y-X) for all valid x and y.
|
||||
|
||||
I don't know the role of the "bootstrap" XID, or how it must be
|
||||
fitted into the above.
|
||||
|
||||
Nathan Myers
|
||||
ncm@zembu.com
|
||||
|
||||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
> We've expended a lot of worry and discussion in the past about what
|
||||
> happens if the OID generator wraps around. However, there is another
|
||||
> 4-byte counter in the system: the transaction ID (XID) generator.
|
||||
> While OID wraparound is survivable, if XIDs wrap around then we really
|
||||
> do have a Ragnarok scenario. The tuple validity checks do ordered
|
||||
> comparisons on XIDs, and will consider tuples with xmin > current xact
|
||||
> to be invalid. Result: after wraparound, your whole database would
|
||||
> instantly vanish from view.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> The first thought that comes to mind is that XIDs should be promoted to
|
||||
> eight bytes. However there are several practical problems with this:
|
||||
> * portability --- I don't believe long long int exists on all the
|
||||
> platforms we support.
|
||||
> * performance --- except on true 64-bit platforms, widening Datum to
|
||||
> eight bytes would be a system-wide performance hit, which is a tad
|
||||
> unpleasant to fix a scenario that's not yet been reported from the
|
||||
> field.
|
||||
> * disk space --- letting pg_log grow without bound isn't a pleasant
|
||||
> prospect either.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> I believe it is possible to fix these problems without widening XID,
|
||||
> by redefining XIDs in a way that allows for wraparound. Here's my
|
||||
> plan:
|
||||
>
|
||||
> 1. Allow XIDs to range from 0 to WRAPLIMIT-1 (WRAPLIMIT is not
|
||||
> necessarily 4G, see discussion below). Ordered comparisons on XIDs
|
||||
> are no longer simply "x < y", but need to be expressed as a macro.
|
||||
> We consider x < y if (y - x) % WRAPLIMIT < WRAPLIMIT/2.
|
||||
> This comparison will work as long as the range of interesting XIDs
|
||||
> never exceeds WRAPLIMIT/2. Essentially, we envision the actual value
|
||||
> of XID as being the low-order bits of a logical XID that always
|
||||
> increases, and we assume that no extant XID is more than WRAPLIMIT/2
|
||||
> transactions old, so we needn't keep track of the high-order bits.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> 2. To keep the system from having to deal with XIDs that are more than
|
||||
> WRAPLIMIT/2 transactions old, VACUUM should "freeze" known-good old
|
||||
> tuples. To do this, we'll reserve a special XID, say 1, that is always
|
||||
> considered committed and is always less than any ordinary XID. (So the
|
||||
> ordered-comparison macro is really a little more complicated than I said
|
||||
> above. Note that there is already a reserved XID just like this in the
|
||||
> system, the "bootstrap" XID. We could simply use the bootstrap XID, but
|
||||
> it seems better to make another one.) When VACUUM finds a tuple that
|
||||
> is committed good and has xmin < XmaxRecent (the oldest XID that might
|
||||
> be considered uncommitted by any open transaction), it will replace that
|
||||
> tuple's xmin by the special always-good XID. Therefore, as long as
|
||||
> VACUUM is run on all tables in the installation more often than once per
|
||||
> WRAPLIMIT/2 transactions, there will be no tuples with ordinary XIDs
|
||||
> older than WRAPLIMIT/2.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> 3. At wraparound, the XID counter has to be advanced to skip over the
|
||||
> InvalidXID value (zero) and the reserved XIDs, so that no real transaction
|
||||
> is generated with those XIDs. No biggie here.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> 4. With the wraparound behavior, pg_log will have a bounded size: it
|
||||
> will never exceed WRAPLIMIT*2 bits = WRAPLIMIT/4 bytes. Since we will
|
||||
> recycle pg_log entries every WRAPLIMIT xacts, during transaction start
|
||||
> the xact manager will have to take care to actively clear its pg_log
|
||||
> entry to zeroes (I'm not sure if it does that already, or just assumes
|
||||
> that new pg_log entries will start out zero). As long as that happens
|
||||
> before the xact makes any data changes, it's OK to recycle the entry.
|
||||
> Note we are assuming that no tuples will remain in the database with
|
||||
> xmin or xmax equal to that XID from a prior cycle of the universe.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> This scheme allows us to survive XID wraparound at the cost of slight
|
||||
> additional complexity in ordered comparisons of XIDs (which is not a
|
||||
> really performance-critical task AFAIK), and at the cost that the
|
||||
> original insertion XIDs of all but recent tuples will be lost by
|
||||
> VACUUM. The system doesn't particularly care about that, but old XIDs
|
||||
> do sometimes come in handy for debugging purposes. A possible
|
||||
> compromise is to overwrite only XIDs that are older than, say,
|
||||
> WRAPLIMIT/4 instead of doing so as soon as possible. This would mean
|
||||
> the required VACUUM frequency is every WRAPLIMIT/4 xacts instead of
|
||||
> every WRAPLIMIT/2 xacts.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> We have a straightforward tradeoff between the maximum size of pg_log
|
||||
> (WRAPLIMIT/4 bytes) and the required frequency of VACUUM (at least
|
||||
> every WRAPLIMIT/2 or WRAPLIMIT/4 transactions). This could be made
|
||||
> configurable in config.h for those who're intent on customization,
|
||||
> but I'd be inclined to set the default value at WRAPLIMIT = 1G.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> Comments? Vadim, is any of this about to be superseded by WAL?
|
||||
> If not, I'd like to fix it for 7.1.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> regards, tom lane
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user