From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)") |
Date: | 2024-06-16 23:30:46 |
Message-ID: | 3050563.1718580646@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 06:52:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... not sure there's a nice way for spginsert() to know whether it's
>> being invoked in REINDEX CONCURRENTLY or a normal INSERT/UPDATE
>> query. Can we trust indexInfo->ii_Concurrent for that?
> I am not sure to understand the redirection part for spgist, but
> except if I am missing something, we already rely on ii_Concurrent for
> other index AMs like BRIN paths to check if we are dealing with a
> concurrent build path or not. index_concurrently_build() is used
> by both CIC and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY, where the flag is set after a
> BuildIndexInfo().
Right. I was thinking that CIC wouldn't reach spginsert(), rather
spgbuild(), but it does feel a bit rickety. A separate flag would
be better.
On the whole I'm inclined to stick with the patch as I have it.
Maybe somebody would like to investigate this idea as an improvement
for v18 or later.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-06-17 05:29:05 | Re: BUG #18483: Segmentation fault in tests modules |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-06-16 23:28:10 | Re: error "can only drop stats once" brings down database |