On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 08:46:25AM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> Thanks for reporting this. It appears like backpatching an equivalent
> of 87a6690cc69 to REL_17/REL_16 would resolve this issue.
FWIW, I fear such a change in the stable branches based on its
invasiveness, particularly because the area of the code dealing with
shutdown sequences has been reworked a lot lately as far as I recall.
I am seriously wondering if we should just let it go and remove the
assertion on v15~v17. It's not perfect, of course, but I value much
more this assertion in terms of any future work that can be done with
pgstats, not in terms of what we could detect for bug fixes.
--
Michael