| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Mario De Frutos Dieguez <mariodefrutos(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: Problem with a "complex" upsert |
| Date: | 2018-08-03 23:14:17 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WznKqSZEOk6kYDPdUkBipiECSu3DD9qyP+FkvtosW9sr9w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> This results in clearly inserting wrong data and/or crashing the
> server. And it's not a huge effect outside of already broken scenarios.
> I think we definitely should try to get this in.
I tend to agree. You told me privately that you had a customer that
had the same issue, so we know that it has affected multiple users.
I think that the surface area for new bugs from the fix has a lot of
overlap with cases that are already probably quite broken. I'm
concerned that existing affected users could suffer pernicious logical
corruption, that goes unnoticed for a long time but ultimately does a
lot of damage.
In the end, it's a matter for Dean, but there is definitely a good
case for proceeding with a full backpatch now, in my view.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-08-03 23:34:11 | Re: Fwd: Problem with a "complex" upsert |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-08-03 22:58:39 | Re: Fwd: Problem with a "complex" upsert |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-08-03 23:34:11 | Re: Fwd: Problem with a "complex" upsert |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-08-03 22:58:39 | Re: Fwd: Problem with a "complex" upsert |