Re: PG19: two RI fast-path issues found while testing the batching revert

From: Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin(at)acm(dot)org>, Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PG19: two RI fast-path issues found while testing the batching revert
Date: 2026-09-12 15:04:01
Message-ID: CAM527d8zpo1zPcAuAnOUA7NyTWVUHqrTfGy0bq6r66jTv_o+4Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Amit,

Thanks. Tested v2 with assertions. PG19 and PG18 regression/isolation
suites pass, as do the reentry and cleanup probes.

Two things:

- On master, `LIKE 'RI %'` catches batch flush contexts retained until
xact end. Restricting it to `RI compare info` and `RI fast-path finfo
scratch` fixes the test; all suites then pass. Checked that it still
catches the actual leak.
- The shared backpatch doesn't apply cleanly with `git apply` on
PG14–17. Adapted PG14 passes too.

I'd keep the dead list for now. No runtime issue found in v2.

Thanks,
Nik

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ayush Tiwari 2026-09-12 15:42:10 Re: Proposal: INSERT ... BY NAME
Previous Message Chee Wooson 2026-09-12 14:16:49 Re: Recovery conflict resolution misses backends that import snapshots