| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bryan Green <dbryan(dot)green(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Fix TOCTOU races in recovery/t/020_archive_status.pl archive checks |
| Date: | 2026-08-10 23:46:20 |
| Message-ID: | anpizO0VLptyOS_e@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 10:32:05AM -0500, Bryan Green wrote:
> I have been playing in this area with a fork, and looking at it more
> closely, this doesn't fix a stock failure. To correct my original note--
> a plain CHECKPOINT doesn't force a segment switch, so that wasn't a real
> trigger either. The change just trades a little coverage (exact-equality
> would catch a spurious extra segment; >= wouldn't) for tolerance of
> concurrent archiving that only happens in the fork. I don't have an
> upstream case for it and I'm happy to drop it. If you think the added
> tolerance is worth keeping as hygiene, I'll leave that to you.
This one depends on the community buildfarm for me, and it looks like
I have lost access to the buildfarm database.. Adding Alexander
Lakhin in CC, perhaps he has bumped into a failure on this one.
I miss the highlights in the CI, now I have not seen this test show up
recently there.
@Alexander: Have you noticed some turbulence in the force regarding
the recovery test 020_archive_status.pl?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2026-08-11 00:04:09 | Re: Why is the LSN reported for pg_logical_emit_message() different from other decoded operations? |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2026-08-10 23:20:39 | Re: Missing list_free in publicationcmds.c:OpenTableList |