Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexey Ermakov <alexey(dot)ermakov(at)dataegret(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maxim Boguk <maxim(dot)boguk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Subject: Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently
Date: 2021-11-09 06:42:17
Message-ID: 20211109064217.GC940092@rfd.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 10:31:19PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2021-11-08 21:46:25 -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> > Doing both sounds harmless. Regarding REINDEX CONCURRENTLY on a system
> > catalog, I bet that can still reach bugs even if we do both, considering this:
>
> Normal catalog aren't REINDEX CONCURRENTLY. It's just toast tables that are
> kind of system-y, but also kind of not, that can be reindexed concurrently.

Oh, okay.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message 菊池祐 2021-11-09 06:52:51 Re: BUG #17269: Why is virtual memory usage of PostgreSQL growing constantly?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-11-09 06:31:19 Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently