| From: | Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Buffer pin leak in hash index bucket splits |
| Date: | 2026-10-11 06:35:55 |
| Message-ID: | CAJTYsWVCa3NQmBjcrTjuiQtwEgGrTsoacmAvQHtLu=K9dpn6BA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Sun, 11 Oct 2026 at 10:12, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> During review of what became bugfix commit 173cf85a, Claude Code found
> an unrelated bug in hash index bucket splits.
>
> Attached bug fix patch adds an isolation test demonstrating the
> problem; with the fix itself reverted, running the Claude-authored
> test shows a buffer pin leak. The leak is caused by _hash_finish_split
> neglecting to release a pin on the primary bucket buffer in its
> failure paths, used when a cleanup lock cannot be acquired. The fix
> just has _hash_finish_split release the pin in those paths.
Thanks for the report and patch. The fix LGTM.
> I doubt that it's worth committing the test itself. It'll add test
> cycles for a trivial issue, that's unlikely to ever regress in the
> future.
+1 on not having one for this.
Regards,
Ayush
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2026-10-11 07:00:01 | Re: [PATCH] Two remaining shmem attachment issues in single-user mode |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-10-11 05:51:09 | Re: Fix WITHOUT OVERLAPS multirange with location replication |