-
Tom Lane authored
it accumulates the set of changes to be made and then applies them. It had to accumulate the set of changes anyway to prepare a WAL record for the pruning action, so this isn't an enormous change; the only new complexity is to not doubly mark tuples that are visited twice in the scan. The main advantage is that we can substantially reduce the scope of the critical section in which the changes are applied, thus avoiding PANIC in foreseeable cases like running out of memory in inval.c. A nice secondary advantage is that it is now far clearer that WAL replay will actually do the same thing that the original pruning did. This commit doesn't do anything about the open problem that CacheInvalidateHeapTuple doesn't have the right semantics for a CTID change caused by collapsing out a redirect pointer. But whatever we do about that, it'll be a good idea to not do it inside a critical section.
6f10eb21