Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6
Date: 2019-04-30 19:11:43
Message-ID: 17996.1556651503@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-04-30 14:41:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think trying to get this "working" is a v13 task now. We've obviously
>> never tried to stress the case before, so you're neither fixing a
>> regression nor fixing a new-in-v12 issue.

> Well, the test *do* test that a previously existing all-branches bug
> doesn't exist, no (albeit one just triggering an assert)? I'm not
> talking about making this concurrency safe, just about whether it's
> possible to somehow keep the tests.

Well, I told you what I thought was a safe way to run the tests.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Joseph Krogh 2019-04-30 19:23:21 Re: ERROR: failed to add item to the index page
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-04-30 19:10:26 Re: Turning off enable_partition_pruning doesn't