| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Orphan page in _bt_split |
| Date: | 2025-09-25 23:49:11 |
| Message-ID: | aNXU90JDXDk2h9wZ@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 03:45:21PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hmm. This looks kind of explicit enough to document the purpose.
> The wording could be simplified a bit more. I'll take it from there.
Reworded a bit more the comments, and applied on HEAD. There could be
an argument for back-patching, I guess, but the lack of complaints is
also an indicator to not do so, and VACUUM is able to handle the
post-failure cleanup should an ERROR happen in flight when splitting
a page.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2025-09-25 23:58:46 | Re: Invalid pointer access in logical decoding after error |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-09-25 23:05:17 | Re: mislead comments in pg_get_statisticsobjdef_string |