On 12/21/21, 11:42 AM, "Mark Dilger" <mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> + /* pre-v9.3 lock-only bit pattern */
> + ereport(ERROR,
> + (errcode(ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTED),
> + errmsg_internal("found tuple with HEAP_XMAX_COMMITTED
> and"
> + "HEAP_XMAX_EXCL_LOCK set and "
> + "HEAP_XMAX_IS_MULTI unset")));
> + }
> +
>
> I find this bit hard to understand. Does the comment mean to suggest that
> the *upgrade* process should have eliminated all pre-v9.3 bit patterns, and
> therefore any such existing patterns are certainly corruption, or does it
> mean that data written by pre-v9.3 servers (and not subsequently updated) is
> defined as corrupt, or .... ?
>
> I am not complaining that the logic is wrong, just trying to wrap my head
> around what the comment means.
This is just another way that a tuple may be marked locked-only, and
we want to explicitly disallow locked-only + xmax-committed. This bit
pattern may be present on servers that were pg_upgraded from pre-v9.3
versions. See commits 0ac5ad5 and 74ebba8 for more detail.
Nathan
