From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | yi huang <yi(dot)codeplayer(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report |
Date: | 2019-09-09 14:05:49 |
Message-ID: | 20190909140549.od4cjv5adnqxzdzx@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hi,
On 2019-09-05 12:59:11 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Did a good bit more comment polishing, renamed a few more variables.
Pushed now, after some more polishing.
> I also added tests for things that I thought were clearly missing
> (including a test that errors out before the code changes in the
> patch).
For 12, I had to replace the NOTICE with WARNING (including SET
client_min_messages). I wonder if we ought to backpatch
commit ebd49928215e3854d91167e798949a75b34958d0
Author: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Date: 2019-07-27 15:59:57 -0400
Don't drop NOTICE messages in isolation tests.
to avoid backpatching pain?
> I tried for a while to develop one for mark/restore of IndexOnlyScans,
> but I concluded that that code is basically dead right now. Every scan
> node of a normal that gets modified or needs a rowmark implies having
> ctid as part of the targetlist. And we neither allow ctid to be part of
> index definitions, nor understand that we actually kinda know the ctid
> from within the index scan (HOT would make using the tid hard). So the
> relevant code in nodeIndexOnly.c seems dead?
I wonder if, on master, we should make ExecIndexOnlyMarkPos(),
ExecIndexOnlyRestrPos() ERROR out in case they're hit for an EPQ
relation, given that they ought to be unreachable.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-09 14:20:27 | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report |
Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2019-09-09 13:56:09 | BUG #15996: Unable to install any PosgresSQL version |