Re: Back-patch is necessary? Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, psuderevsky(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Back-patch is necessary? Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
Date: 2020-05-07 08:57:00
Message-ID: CAA4eK1LC_6+2Rufgen8UrjWcr1QKgaqyk3atfBHEG=0ZWw2mwQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:13 PM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 2020/05/02 20:40, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > I don't see any obvious problem with the changed code but we normally
> > don't backpatch performance improvements. I can see that the code
> > change here appears to be straight forward so it might be fine to
> > backpatch this. Have we seen similar reports earlier as well? AFAIK,
> > this functionality is for a long time and if people were facing this
> > on a regular basis then we would have seen such reports multiple
> > times. I mean to say if the chances of this hitting are less then we
> > can even choose not to backpatch this.
>
> I found the following two reports. ISTM there are not so many reports...
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/16159-f5a34a3a04dc67e0@postgresql.org
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/dd6690b0-ec03-6b3c-6fac-c963f91f87a7%40postgrespro.ru
>

The first seems to be the same where this bug has been fixed. It has
been moved to hackers in email [1]. Am, I missing something?
Considering it has been encountered by two different people, I think
it would not be a bad idea to back-patch this.

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200129.120222.1476610231001551715.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2020-05-07 08:58:03 BUG #16420: problem running into post install step while installation.
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2020-05-07 06:43:40 Re: Back-patch is necessary? Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-05-07 09:12:16 Re: Fix pg_buffercache document
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-05-07 08:52:40 Fix pg_buffercache document