Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

Hi, On 2018-12-21 02:40:18 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:41 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > Please, find attached two patches I'm going to commit: for master and > > for backpatching. > > So, pushed. I noticed that I didn't adapt this in commit

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:41 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Please, find attached two patches I'm going to commit: for master and > for backpatching. So, pushed. -- Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 2:04 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:35 PM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:40 AM Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:25 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > On 2018-12-17 01:03:52 +0300, Alexander

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:35 PM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:40 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:25 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2018-12-17 01:03:52 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > > Sorry for delay. Attached patch implements

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 4:41 PM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > I thought about that, but decided it's better to mimic B-tree and hash > behavior rather than invent new logic in a minor release. But given > that new WAL record in minor release in substantial problem, that > argument doesn't matter.

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:40 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:25 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2018-12-17 01:03:52 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > Sorry for delay. Attached patch implements conflict handling for gist > > > microvacuum like btree and hash. I'm

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:25 AM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-12-17 01:03:52 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:28 AM Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > Is there any reason something like that isn't

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

Hi, On 2018-12-17 01:03:52 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:28 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > Is there any reason something like that isn't necessary for gist? If so, > > > where's that documented? If

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:28 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > Is there any reason something like that isn't necessary for gist? If so, > > where's that documented? If not, uh, isn't that a somewhat serious bug > > in gist? > > Thank you for

Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Andres Freund wrote: > Is there any reason something like that isn't necessary for gist? If so, > where's that documented? If not, uh, isn't that a somewhat serious bug > in gist? Thank you for pointing! This looks like a bug for me too. I'm going to investigate

gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby?

Hi, Am I missing something or did commit 013ebc0a7b7ea9c1b1ab7a3d4dd75ea121ea8ba7 Author: Teodor Sigaev Date: 2015-09-09 18:43:37 +0300 Microvacuum for GIST Mark index tuple as dead if it's pointed by kill_prior_tuple during ordinary (search) scan and remove it during insert