• Tom Lane's avatar
    Forget about targeting catalog cache invalidations by tuple TID. · 632ae682
    Tom Lane authored
    The TID isn't stable enough: we might queue an sinval event before a VACUUM
    FULL, and then process it afterwards, when the target tuple no longer has
    the same TID.  So we must invalidate entries on the basis of hash value
    only.  The old coding can be shown to result in various bizarre,
    hard-to-reproduce errors in the presence of concurrent VACUUM FULLs on
    system catalogs, and could easily result in permanent catalog corruption,
    up to and including complete loss of tables.
    
    This commit is just a minimal fix that removes the unsafe comparison.
    We should remove transmission of the tuple TID from sinval messages
    altogether, and then arrange to suppress the extra message in the common
    case of a heap_update that doesn't change the key hashvalue.  But that's
    going to be much more invasive, and will only produce a probably-marginal
    performance gain, so it doesn't seem like material for a back-patch.
    
    Back-patch to 9.0.  Before that, VACUUM FULL refused to do any tuple moving
    if it found any INSERT_IN_PROGRESS or DELETE_IN_PROGRESS tuples (and
    CLUSTER would give up altogether), so there was no risk of moving a tuple
    that might be the subject of an unsent sinval message.
    632ae682
catcache.c 46.2 KB