This reverts commits 0147fc7, 4567596, aa64f23, and 5ecd018.
There is no longer agreement that introducing this function
was the right way to address the problem. The consensus now
seems to favor trying to make a correct value for MaxBackends
available to mdules executing their _PG_init() functions.
Nathan Bossart
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20220323045229.i23skfscdbvrsuxa@jrouhaud
Before commit 412ad7a556, delayChkpt
was a Boolean. Now it's an integer. Extensions using it need to be
appropriately updated, so let's rename the field to make sure that
a hard compilation failure occurs.
Replacing delayChkpt with delayChkptFlags made a few comments extend
past 80 characters, so I reflowed them and changed some wording very
slightly.
The back-branches will need a different change to restore compatibility
with existing minor releases; this is just for master.
Per suggestion from Tom Lane.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/a7880f4d-1d74-582a-ada7-dad168d046d1@enterprisedb.com
If TRUNCATE causes some buffers to be invalidated and thus the
checkpoint does not flush them, TRUNCATE must also ensure that the
corresponding files are truncated on disk. Otherwise, a replay
from the checkpoint might find that the buffers exist but have
the wrong contents, which may cause replay to fail.
Report by Teja Mupparti. Patch by Kyotaro Horiguchi, per a design
suggestion from Heikki Linnakangas, with some changes to the
comments by me. Review of this and a prior patch that approached
the issue differently by Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Álvaro
Herrera, Masahiko Sawada, and Tom Lane.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/BYAPR06MB6373BF50B469CA393C614257ABF00@BYAPR06MB6373.namprd06.prod.outlook.com
Previously, it was really easy to write code that accessed MaxBackends
before we'd actually initialized it, especially when coding up an
extension. To make this less error-prune, introduce a new function
GetMaxBackends() which should be used to obtain the correct value.
This will ERROR if called too early. Demote the global variable to
a file-level static, so that nobody can peak at it directly.
Nathan Bossart. Idea by Andres Freund. Review by Greg Sabino Mullane,
by Michael Paquier (who had doubts about the approach), and by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20210802224204.bckcikl45uezv5e4@alap3.anarazel.de
Commit 8431e296ea reworked ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo to sort XIDs
before adding them to KnownAssignedXids. But the XIDs are sorted using
xidComparator, which compares the XIDs simply as uint32 values, not
logically. KnownAssignedXidsAdd() however expects XIDs in logical order,
and calls TransactionIdFollowsOrEquals() to enforce that. If there are
XIDs for which the two orderings disagree, an error is raised and the
recovery fails/restarts.
Hitting this issue is fairly easy - you just need two transactions, one
started before the 4B limit (e.g. XID 4294967290), the other sometime
after it (e.g. XID 1000). Logically (4294967290 <= 1000) but when
compared using xidComparator we try to add them in the opposite order.
Which makes KnownAssignedXidsAdd() fail with an error like this:
ERROR: out-of-order XID insertion in KnownAssignedXids
This only happens during replica startup, while processing RUNNING_XACTS
records to build the snapshot. Once we reach STANDBY_SNAPSHOT_READY, we
skip these records. So this does not affect already running replicas,
but if you restart (or create) a replica while there are transactions
with XIDs for which the two orderings disagree, you may hit this.
Long-running transactions and frequent replica restarts increase the
likelihood of hitting this issue. Once the replica gets into this state,
it can't be started (even if the old transactions are terminated).
Fixed by sorting the XIDs logically - this is fine because we're dealing
with normal XIDs (because it's XIDs assigned to backends) and from the
same wraparound epoch (otherwise the backends could not be running at
the same time on the primary node). So there are no problems with the
triangle inequality, which is why xidComparator compares raw values.
Investigation and root cause analysis by Abhijit Menon-Sen. Patch by me.
This issue is present in all releases since 9.4, however releases up to
9.6 are EOL already so backpatch to 10 only.
Reviewed-by: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/36b8a501-5d73-277c-4972-f58a4dce088a%40enterprisedb.com
While determining xid horizons, we skip over backends that are running
Vacuum. We also ignore Create Index Concurrently, or Reindex Concurrently
for the purposes of computing Xmin for Vacuum. But we were not setting the
flags corresponding to these operations when they are performed in
parallel which was preventing Xid horizon from advancing.
The optimization related to skipping Create Index Concurrently, or Reindex
Concurrently operations was implemented in PG-14 but the fix is the same
for the Parallel Vacuum as well so back-patched till PG-13.
Author: Masahiko Sawada
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoCLQqgM1sXh9BrDFq0uzd3RBFKi=Vfo6cjjKODm0Onr5w@mail.gmail.com
Currently, lastOverflowedXid is never reset. It's just adjusted on new
transactions known to be overflowed. But if there are no overflowed
transactions for a long time, snapshots could be mistakenly marked as
suboverflowed due to wraparound.
This commit fixes this issue by resetting lastOverflowedXid when needed
altogether with KnownAssignedXids.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Stan Hu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMBWrQ%3DFp5UAsU_nATY7EMY7NHczG4-DTDU%3DmCvBQZAQ6wa2xQ%40mail.gmail.com
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Alexander Korotkov
Reviewed-by: Stan Hu, Simon Riggs, Nikolay Samokhvalov, Andrey Borodin, Dmitry Dolgov
ProcArrayGroupClearXid function has a parameter named "proc",
but the same name was used for its local variables. This commit fixes
this variable shadowing, to improve code readability.
Back-patch to all supported versions, to make future back-patching
easy though this patch is classified as refactoring only.
Reported-by: Ranier Vilela
Author: Ranier Vilela, Aleksander Alekseev
https://postgr.es/m/CAEudQAqyoTZC670xWi6w-Oe2_Bk1bfu2JzXz6xRfiOUzm7xbyQ@mail.gmail.com
All size_t variables declared in procarray.c are actually int ones.
Let's use int instead of size_t for those variables. Which would
reduce Wsign-compare compiler warnings.
Back-patch to v14 where commit 941697c3c1 added size_t variables
in procarray.c, to make future back-patching easy though
this patch is classified as refactoring only.
Reported-by: Ranier Vilela
Author: Ranier Vilela, Aleksander Alekseev
https://postgr.es/m/CAEudQAqyoTZC670xWi6w-Oe2_Bk1bfu2JzXz6xRfiOUzm7xbyQ@mail.gmail.com
They are used in code that runs both during normal operation and during
WAL replay, and needs to behave differently during replay. Move them to
xlogutils.c, because that's where we have other helper functions used by
redo routines.
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b3b71061-4919-e882-4857-27e370ab134a%40iki.fi
5a1e1d8302 was a minimal bug fix for dc7420c2c9. To avoid future bugs of
that kind, deduplicate the choice of a relation's horizon into a new helper,
GlobalVisHorizonKindForRel().
As the code in question was only introduced in dc7420c2c9 it seems worth
backpatching this change as well, otherwise 14 will look different from all
other branches.
A different approach to this was suggested by Matthias van de Meent.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210621122919.2qhu3pfugxxp3cji@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 14, like 5a1e1d8302
In dc7420c2c9 I (Andres) accidentally used
RelationIsAccessibleInLogicalDecoding() as the sole condition to use the
non-shared catalog horizon in GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId(). That is
incorrect, as RelationIsAccessibleInLogicalDecoding() checks whether wal_level
is logical.
The correct check, as done e.g. in GlobalVisTestFor(), is to check
IsCatalogRelation() and RelationIsAccessibleInLogicalDecoding().
The observed misbehavior of this bug was that there could be an endless loop
in lazy_scan_prune(), because the horizons used in heap_page_prune() and the
individual tuple liveliness checks did not match. Likely there are other
potential consequences as well.
A later commit will unify the determination which horizon has to be used, and
add additional assertions to make it easier to catch a bug like this.
Reported-By: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Diagnosed-By: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
Author: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEze2Wg32Y9+WJfw=aofkRx1ZRFt_Ev6bNPc4PSaz7PjSFtZgQ@mail.gmail.com
941697c3c1 changed ProcArrayAdd()/Remove() substantially. As reported by
zhanyi, I missed that due to the introduction of the PGPROC->pgxactoff
ProcArrayRemove() does not need to search for the position in
procArray->pgprocnos anymore - that's pgxactoff. Remove the search loop.
The removal of the search loop reduces assertion coverage a bit - but we can
easily do better than before by adding assertions to other loops over
pgprocnos elements.
Also do a bit of cleanup, mostly by reducing line lengths by introducing local
helper variables and adding newlines.
Author: zhanyi <w@hidva.com>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/tencent_5624AA3B116B3D1C31CA9744@qq.com
Also "make reformat-dat-files".
The only change worthy of note is that pgindent messed up the formatting
of launcher.c's struct LogicalRepWorkerId, which led me to notice that
that struct wasn't used at all anymore, so I just took it out.
Snapshot caching, introduced in 623a9ba79b, did not increment
xactCompletionCount during subtransaction abort. That could lead to an older
snapshot being reused. That is, at least as far as I can see, not a
correctness issue (for MVCC snapshots there's no difference between "in
progress" and "aborted"). The only difference between the old and new
snapshots would be a newer ->xmax.
While HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC makes the same visibility determination, reusing
the old snapshot leads HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC to not set
HEAP_XMIN_INVALID. Which subsequently causes the kill_prior_tuple optimization
to not kick in (via HeapTupleIsSurelyDead() returning false). The performance
effects of doing the same index-lookups over and over again is how the issue
was discovered...
Fix the issue by incrementing xactCompletionCount in
XidCacheRemoveRunningXids. It already acquires ProcArrayLock exclusively,
making that an easy proposition.
Add a test to ensure that kill_prior_tuple prevents index growth when it
involves aborted subtransaction of the current transaction.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210406043521.lopeo7bbigad3n6t@alap3.anarazel.de
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210317055718.v6qs3ltzrformqoa%40alap3.anarazel.de
As envisioned in commit c98763bf51, it is possible for VACUUM to
ignore certain transactions that are executing CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY
and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY for the purposes of computing Xmin; that's
because we know those transactions are not going to examine any other
tables, and are not going to execute anything else in the same
transaction. (Only operations on "safe" indexes can be ignored: those
on indexes that are neither partial nor expressional).
This is extremely useful in cases where CIC/RC can run for a very long
time, because that used to be a significant headache for concurrent
vacuuming of other tables.
Reviewed-by: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210115133858.GA18931@alvherre.pgsql
GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() is now GlobalVisCheckRemovableFullXid().
This is consistent with the general convention for FullTransactionId
equivalents of functions that deal with TransactionId values. It now
matches the nearby GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid() function, which performs
the same check for callers that use TransactionId values.
Oversight in commit dc7420c2c9.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wzmes12jFNDcVgpU89Vp=r6uLFrE-MT0fjSWGsE70UiNaA@mail.gmail.com
The deadlocks that the recovery conflict on lock is involved in can
happen between hot-standby backends and the startup process.
If a backend takes an access exclusive lock on the table and which
finally triggers the deadlock, that deadlock can be detected
as expected. On the other hand, previously, if the startup process
took an access exclusive lock and which finally triggered the deadlock,
that deadlock could not be detected and could remain even after
deadlock_timeout passed. This is a bug.
The cause of this bug was that the code for handling the recovery
conflict on lock didn't take care of deadlock case at all. It assumed
that deadlocks involving the startup process and backends were able
to be detected by the deadlock detector invoked within backends.
But this assumption was incorrect. The startup process also should
have invoked the deadlock detector if necessary.
To fix this bug, this commit makes the startup process invoke
the deadlock detector if deadlock_timeout is reached while handling
the recovery conflict on lock. Specifically, in that case, the startup
process requests all the backends holding the conflicting locks to
check themselves for deadlocks.
Back-patch to v9.6. v9.5 has also this bug, but per discussion we decided
not to back-patch the fix to v9.5. Because v9.5 doesn't have some
infrastructure codes (e.g., 37c54863cf) that this bug fix patch depends on.
We can apply those codes for the back-patch, but since the next minor
version release is the final one for v9.5, it's risky to do that. If we
unexpectedly introduce new bug to v9.5 by the back-patch, there is no
chance to fix that. We determined that the back-patch to v9.5 would give
more risk than gain.
Author: Fujii Masao
Reviewed-by: Bertrand Drouvot, Masahiko Sawada, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/4041d6b6-cf24-a120-36fa-1294220f8243@oss.nttdata.com
Reverts 27838981be (some comments are kept). Per discussion, it does
not seem safe to relax the lock level used for this; in order for it to
be safe, there would have to be memory barriers between the point we set
the flag and the point we set the trasaction Xid, which perhaps would
not be so bad; but there would also have to be barriers at the readers'
side, which from a performance perspective might be bad.
Now maybe this analysis is wrong and it *is* safe for some reason, but
proof of that is not trivial.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201118190928.vnztes7c2sldu43a@alap3.anarazel.de
We don't actually need a lock to set PGPROC->statusFlags itself; what we
do need is a shared lock on either XidGenLock or ProcArrayLock in order to
ensure MyProc->pgxactoff keeps still while we modify the mirror array in
ProcGlobal->statusFlags. Some places were using an exclusive lock for
that, which is excessive. Relax those to use shared lock only.
procarray.c has a couple of places with somewhat brittle assumptions
about PGPROC changes: ProcArrayEndTransaction uses only shared lock, so
it's permissible to change MyProc only. On the other hand,
ProcArrayEndTransactionInternal also changes other procs, so it must
hold exclusive lock. Add asserts to ensure those assumptions continue
to hold.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201117155501.GA13805@alvherre.pgsql
When ComputeXidHorizons() was called before MyDatabaseOid is set,
e.g. because a dead row in a shared relation is encountered during
InitPostgres(), the horizon for normal tables was computed too
aggressively, ignoring all backends connected to a database.
During subsequent pruning in a data table the too aggressive horizon
could end up still being used, possibly leading to still needed tuples
being removed. Not good.
This is a bug in dc7420c2c9, which the test added in 94bc27b576 made
visible, if run with force_parallel_mode set to regress. In that case
the bug is reliably triggered, because "pruning_query" is run in a
parallel worker and the start of that parallel worker is likely to
encounter a dead row in pg_database.
The fix is trivial: Compute a more pessimistic data table horizon if
MyDatabaseId is not yet known.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201029040030.p4osrmaywhqaesd4@alap3.anarazel.de
This fixes a bug in the edge case where, for a temp table, heap_page_prune()
can end up with a different horizon than heap_vacuum_rel(). Which can trigger
errors like "ERROR: cannot freeze committed xmax ...".
The bug was introduced due to interaction of a7212be8b9 "Set cutoff xmin more
aggressively when vacuuming a temporary table." with dc7420c2c9 "snapshot
scalability: Don't compute global horizons while building snapshots.".
The problem is caused by lazy_scan_heap() assuming that the only reason its
HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum() call would return HEAPTUPLE_DEAD is if the tuple is
a HOT tuple, or if the tuple's inserting transaction has aborted since the
heap_page_prune() call. But after a7212be8b9 that was also possible in other
cases for temp tables, because heap_page_prune() uses a different visibility
test after dc7420c2c9.
The fix is fairly simple: Move the special case logic for temp tables from
vacuum_set_xid_limits() to the infrastructure introduced in dc7420c2c9. That
ensures that the horizon used for pruning is at least as aggressive as the one
used by lazy_scan_heap(). The concrete horizon used for temp tables is
slightly different than the logic in dc7420c2c9, but should always be as
aggressive as before (see comments).
A significant benefit to centralizing the logic procarray.c is that now the
more aggressive horizons for temp tables does not just apply to VACUUM but
also to e.g. HOT pruning and the nbtree killtuples logic.
Because isTopLevel is not needed by vacuum_set_xid_limits() anymore, I
undid the the related changes from a7212be8b9.
This commit also adds an isolation test ensuring that the more aggressive
vacuuming and pruning of temp tables keeps working.
Debugged-By: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Debugged-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Debugged-By: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201014203103.72oke6hqywcyhx7s@alap3.anarazel.de
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201015083735.derdzysdtqdvxshp@alap3.anarazel.de
I (Andres) broke this in 623a9CA79bx, because I didn't think about the
way snapshots are built on standbys sufficiently. Unfortunately our
existing tests did not catch this, as they are all just querying with
psql (therefore ending up with fresh snapshots).
The fix is trivial, we just need to increment the transaction
completion counter in ExpireTreeKnownAssignedTransactionIds(), which
is the equivalent of ProcArrayEndTransaction() during recovery.
This commit also adds a new test doing some basic testing of the
correctness of snapshots built on standbys. To avoid the
aforementioned issue of one-shot psql's not exercising the snapshot
caching, the test uses a long lived psqls, similar to
013_crash_restart.pl. It'd be good to extend the test further.
Reported-By: Ian Barwick <ian.barwick@2ndquadrant.com>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Author: Ian Barwick <ian.barwick@2ndquadrant.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/61291ffe-d611-f889-68b5-c298da9fb18f@2ndquadrant.com
This corrects an oversight by me in 2072932407, which made
ProcArrayClearTransaction() increment xactCompletionCount. That requires an
exclusive lock, obviously.
There's other approaches that avoid the exclusive acquisition, but given that a
2PC commit is fairly heavyweight, it doesn't seem worth doing so. I've not been
able to measure a performance difference, unsurprisingly. I did add a
comment documenting that we could do so, should it ever become a bottleneck.
Reported-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1355915.1597794204@sss.pgh.pa.us
When preparing a transaction xactCompletionCount needs to be
incremented, even though the transaction has not committed
yet. Otherwise the snapshot used within the transaction otherwise can
get reused outside of the prepared transaction. As GetSnapshotData()
does not include the current xid when building a snapshot, reuse would
not be correct.
Somewhat surprisingly the regression tests only rarely show incorrect
results without the fix. The reason for that is that often the
snapshot's xmax will be >= the backend xid, yielding a snapshot that
is correct, despite the bug.
I'm working on a reliable test for the bug, but it seems worth seeing
whether this fixes all the BF failures while I do.
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1k7tGP-0005V0-5k@gemulon.postgresql.org
Previous commits made it faster/more scalable to compute snapshots. But not
building a snapshot is still faster. Now that GetSnapshotData() does not
maintain RecentGlobal* anymore, that is actually not too hard:
This commit introduces xactCompletionCount, which tracks the number of
top-level transactions with xids (i.e. which may have modified the database)
that completed in some form since the start of the server.
We can avoid rebuilding the snapshot's contents whenever the current
xactCompletionCount is the same as it was when the snapshot was
originally built. Currently this check happens while holding
ProcArrayLock. While it's likely possible to perform the check without
acquiring ProcArrayLock, it seems better to do that separately /
later, some careful analysis is required. Even with the lock this is a
significant win on its own.
On a smaller two socket machine this gains another ~1.03x, on a larger
machine the effect is roughly double (earlier patch version tested
though). If we were able to safely avoid the lock there'd be another
significant gain on top of that.
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200301083601.ews6hz5dduc3w2se@alap3.anarazel.de
This bug, recently introduced in 941697c3c1, at least lead to vacuum
failing because it found tuples inserted by a running transaction, but
below the freeze limit. The freeze limit in turn is directly affected
by the aforementioned bug.
Thanks to Tom Lane figuring how to make the bug reproducible.
We should add a few more assertions to make sure this type of bug
isn't as hard to notice, but it's not yet clear how to best do so.
Co-Diagnosed-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1013484.1597609043@sss.pgh.pa.us
Similar to the previous changes this increases the chance that data
frequently needed by GetSnapshotData() stays in l2 cache. In many
workloads subtransactions are very rare, and this makes the check for
that considerably cheaper.
As this removes the last member of PGXACT, there is no need to keep it
around anymore.
On a larger 2 socket machine this and the two preceding commits result
in a ~1.07x performance increase in read-only pgbench. For read-heavy
mixed r/w workloads without row level contention, I see about 1.1x.
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200301083601.ews6hz5dduc3w2se@alap3.anarazel.de
The new array contains the xids for all connected backends / in-use
PGPROC entries in a dense manner (in contrast to the PGPROC/PGXACT
arrays which can have unused entries interspersed).
This improves performance because GetSnapshotData() always needs to
scan the xids of all live procarray entries and now there's no need to
go through the procArray->pgprocnos indirection anymore.
As the set of running top-level xids changes rarely, compared to the
number of snapshots taken, this substantially increases the likelihood
of most data required for a snapshot being in l2 cache. In
read-mostly workloads scanning the xids[] array will sufficient to
build a snapshot, as most backends will not have an xid assigned.
To keep the xid array dense ProcArrayRemove() needs to move entries
behind the to-be-removed proc's one further up in the array. Obviously
moving array entries cannot happen while a backend sets it
xid. I.e. locking needs to prevent that array entries are moved while
a backend modifies its xid.
To avoid locking ProcArrayLock in GetNewTransactionId() - a fairly hot
spot already - ProcArrayAdd() / ProcArrayRemove() now needs to hold
XidGenLock in addition to ProcArrayLock. Adding / Removing a procarray
entry is not a very frequent operation, even taking 2PC into account.
Due to the above, the dense array entries can only be read or modified
while holding ProcArrayLock and/or XidGenLock. This prevents a
concurrent ProcArrayRemove() from shifting the dense array while it is
accessed concurrently.
While the new dense array is very good when needing to look at all
xids it is less suitable when accessing a single backend's xid. In
particular it would be problematic to have to acquire a lock to access
a backend's own xid. Therefore a backend's xid is not just stored in
the dense array, but also in PGPROC. This also allows a backend to
only access the shared xid value when the backend had acquired an
xid.
The infrastructure added in this commit will be used for the remaining
PGXACT fields in subsequent commits. They are kept separate to make
review easier.
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200301083601.ews6hz5dduc3w2se@alap3.anarazel.de
Now that xmin isn't needed for GetSnapshotData() anymore, it leads to
unnecessary cacheline ping-pong to have it in PGXACT, as it is updated
considerably more frequently than the other PGXACT members.
After the changes in dc7420c2c9, this is a very straight-forward change.
For highly concurrent, snapshot acquisition heavy, workloads this change alone
can significantly increase scalability. E.g. plain pgbench on a smaller 2
socket machine gains 1.07x for read-only pgbench, 1.22x for read-only pgbench
when submitting queries in batches of 100, and 2.85x for batches of 100
'SELECT';. The latter numbers are obviously not to be expected in the
real-world, but micro-benchmark the snapshot computation
scalability (previously spending ~80% of the time in GetSnapshotData()).
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200301083601.ews6hz5dduc3w2se@alap3.anarazel.de
