Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
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 14:20:27
Message-ID: 28984.1568038827@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-09-05 12:59:11 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> 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.

I'd vote against. The chain of reasoning that says they're unreachable
is long and involves mostly code that's nowhere near there, so when/if
somebody made a change that broke that reasoning, they'd not necessarily
notice that the ERROR has to be undone.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2019-09-09 18:33:19 BUG #15997: PgManager giving error while looking a table with PgV12
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-09-09 14:05:49 Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report