| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Oskari Saarenmaa <os(at)aiven(dot)io>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Tripp <peter(at)chartio(dot)com>, Virendra Negi <virendra(at)idyllic-software(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple |
| Date: | 2016-07-30 00:37:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZS0u0LcoYbeUp0TQFcR--p8LdDrMmySqXP7i_pYbnP9=w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> That it needs a test, or that it's easy to do?
>
> That it's easy to write one.
I'll be more concrete: I don't see what choke point is available to
make control yield after the pre-check determines there is no
conflict, but before index tuple insertion determines that there is in
fact a conflict (to reliably trigger a failed specualtive
insertion/super deletion).
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-07-30 01:47:33 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty() |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2016-07-30 00:26:25 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty() |