| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: SSI: ON CONFLICT DO SELECT takes no predicate lock on the returned row |
| Date: | 2026-09-23 19:17:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCVa3w1_eCRc376OB6u_92vrg3jnCwi4bvYHRt_Lak15Vg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 23 Sept 2026 at 13:51, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2026, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm thinking now that making ExecCheckIndexConstraints() require
> > estate->es_snapshot was actually an unintended change of the kind that
> > probably wasn't safe for back-patching, because it might affect
> > extension code.
>
> I forgot to mention this, but the issue I mentioned only exists in 18
> and 19, earlier branches are not affected (at least without
> extensions).
Grepping on PGXN, I see no use of ExecCheckIndexConstraints(), so it's
probably your fix is OK.
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2026-09-23 20:12:40 | Re: 64-bit MultiXactOffset vs. 9.3->9.4 upgrade, pg_resetwal, "wraparound" msg |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2026-09-23 19:14:11 | Re: Adding a range check on the sequence index from the publisher. |