Re: Two issues leading to discrepancies in FSM data on the standby server

From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexey Makhmutov <a(dot)makhmutov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Two issues leading to discrepancies in FSM data on the standby server
Date: 2026-04-30 21:57:19
Message-ID: CAAKRu_bDNKtC61WsnQUC+z=MW+sZ6hajevB-EpYw8Ji3VTb1jw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 10:15 AM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 8:32 AM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > > It is a bug that is causing overly optimistic FSM
> > > numbers, but it's not a correctness issue like wrong results/data
> > > corruption etc. So, I think you could make an argument either way
> > > about fixing it.
> >
> > It has user-visible effect of increased insertion time after replica
> > promotion. I think this is quite a reason to backpatch.
>
> Right, since it's not invasive, I'm fine with backpatching.

Alexander, are you planning on committing this?

- Melanie

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2026-04-30 22:03:05 Re: [PATCH] Compressed TOAST data corruption with REPACK CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2026-04-30 21:44:28 Re: Why clearing the VM doesn't require registering vm buffer in wal record