On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 08:16:13PM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
> Slightly tangential but are the locking operations associated with the
> recent bugfix generated in both (all?) modes or only hot_standby?

All modes.

> I thought
> it strange that transient locking operations were output with WAL though I
> get it if they are there to support read-only queries.

It is unintuitive.  This comment in heap_lock_tuple() attempts to explain:

        /*
         * XLOG stuff.  You might think that we don't need an XLOG record 
because
         * there is no state change worth restoring after a crash.  You would be
         * wrong however: we have just written either a TransactionId or a
         * MultiXactId that may never have been seen on disk before, and we need
         * to make sure that there are XLOG entries covering those ID numbers.
         * Else the same IDs might be re-used after a crash, which would be
         * disastrous if this page made it to disk before the crash.  
Essentially
         * we have to enforce the WAL log-before-data rule even in this case.
         * (Also, in a PITR log-shipping or 2PC environment, we have to have 
XLOG
         * entries for everything anyway.)
         */

Another reason not mentioned is torn pages.  Locking a tuple updates t_xmax,
t_infomask2 and t_infomask.  It's possible for t_xmax to fall on one side of a
page tear and the infomasks to fall on the other side.  Writing t_xmax without
writing the corresponding infomasks could cause the tuple to be considered
deleted, not merely locked, after a crash.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to