Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  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