Re: [SP-]GiST IOS visibility bug (was: Why doens't GiST require super-exclusive lock)

From: solai v <solai(dot)cdac(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
Subject: Re: [SP-]GiST IOS visibility bug (was: Why doens't GiST require super-exclusive lock)
Date: 2026-06-30 04:08:29
Message-ID: CAF0whuce3Y8ubVcS5z+d+HrOH4VkxSxrAAOsaqq_==6O5+MpYw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I tested the v02 patch series.
The patches applied cleanly and PostgreSQL built successfully.
I created a GiST index and verified that the query uses an Index Only
Scan (Heap Fetches: 0). I also tried to reproduce the reported race
condition by running concurrent Index Only Scans together with DELETE
and VACUUM operations, but I wasn't able to reproduce the issue
manually. Since this is a timing-dependent race condition, that wasn't
too surprising.
After applying the patches, I rebuilt PostgreSQL and ran the test
suite. All 245 tests passed, including the new regression test added
by this patch, and I didn't notice any regressions during my testing.
Overall, the patch applied cleanly, built successfully, and my testing
didn't reveal any issues.

regards

solai

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Feng Wu 2026-06-30 04:18:36 [PATCH] Avoid internal error for invalid interval typmods
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2026-06-30 03:53:22 Re: [PATCH] Document wal_compression=on