| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM can finish an interrupted nbtree page split -- is that okay? |
| Date: | 2019-05-16 20:11:41 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WznFHC9s+cTR2NJFsnN859Ske=f8ae5ZbUb8ZWRR=OA=Qg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 1:05 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Actually, now that I look back at how page deletion worked 5+ years
> ago, I realize that I have this slightly wrong: the leaf level check
> is not sufficient to figure out if the parent's right sibling is
> pending deletion (which is represented explicitly as a half-dead
> internal page prior to 9.4). All the same, I'm going to push ahead
> with this patch. Bugfix commit efada2b8e92 was always about a bug in
> 9.4 -- it had nothing to do with 9.3.
I meant bugfix commit 8da31837803 (commit efada2b8e92 was the commit
that had the bug in question).
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2019-05-16 20:59:47 | Re: Adding a test for speculative insert abort case |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-05-16 20:05:36 | Re: VACUUM can finish an interrupted nbtree page split -- is that okay? |