Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) doesn't check the table AM

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de
Subject: Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) doesn't check the table AM
Date: 2026-09-01 03:45:00
Message-ID: CALj2ACUkho+rCROOqgNZq4FUTc_h2Mq9AHRU=sakVstEYFkToA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 3:51 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 12:57 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If the table AM doesn't support logical decoding, concurrent repack
> > > > would silently lose some table data as it misses the changes
> > > > happened during the rewrites.
> > >
> > > Yes, that's correct. I came to the same conclusion.

Please find the attached v3 patch with a test added similar to other
restricted error cases. Sorry for the noise.

--
Bharath Rupireddy
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-Restrict-concurrent-repack-to-the-heap-access-met.patch application/octet-stream 4.8 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2026-09-01 03:53:11 Re: pg_*_advice: tsv load failure, etc.
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2026-09-01 03:35:00 Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) rewrites tables marked with user_catalog_table