mirror of
https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
synced 2025-01-30 19:00:29 +08:00
Don't clear btpo_cycleid during _bt_vacuum_one_page.
When "vacuuming" a single btree page by removing LP_DEAD tuples, we are not
actually within a vacuum operation, but rather in an ordinary insertion
process that could well be running concurrently with a vacuum. So clearing
the cycleid is incorrect, and could cause the concurrent vacuum to miss
removing tuples that it needs to remove. This is a longstanding bug
introduced by commit e6284649b9
of
2006-07-25. I believe it explains Maxim Boguk's recent report of index
corruption, and probably some other previously unexplained reports.
In 9.0 and up this is a one-line fix; before that we need to introduce a
flag to tell _bt_delitems what to do.
This commit is contained in:
parent
9789c99d01
commit
593a9631a7
@ -841,11 +841,9 @@ _bt_delitems_delete(Relation rel, Buffer buf,
|
||||
PageIndexMultiDelete(page, itemnos, nitems);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* We can clear the vacuum cycle ID since this page has certainly been
|
||||
* processed by the current vacuum scan.
|
||||
* Unlike _bt_delitems_vacuum, we *must not* clear the vacuum cycle ID,
|
||||
* because this is not called by VACUUM.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
opaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(page);
|
||||
opaque->btpo_cycleid = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Mark the page as not containing any LP_DEAD items. This is not
|
||||
@ -854,6 +852,7 @@ _bt_delitems_delete(Relation rel, Buffer buf,
|
||||
* true and it doesn't seem worth an additional page scan to check it.
|
||||
* Remember that BTP_HAS_GARBAGE is only a hint anyway.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
opaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(page);
|
||||
opaque->btpo_flags &= ~BTP_HAS_GARBAGE;
|
||||
|
||||
MarkBufferDirty(buf);
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user