| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de |
| Subject: | Re: REPACK (ANALYZE) within transaction block segfaults |
| Date: | 2026-08-27 19:39:35 |
| Message-ID: | apCSd2NvvEJfBmVu@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 01:09:59AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 10:56 PM Nathan Bossart
> <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Presumably we need to handle transaction blocks a bit like how vacuum()
>> does. Or maybe even prevent REPACK (ANALYZE) within a transaction block.
>
> I looked into this a bit. I think the problem is not ordinary
> transaction blocks themselves, but non-top-level execution, such as the
> DO block in the reproducer.
>
> So the attached patch rejects only non-top-level REPACK (ANALYZE)
> commands.
Hm. Couldn't we do something like the in_outer_xact/use_own_xacts stuff in
vacuum() to get it working instead?
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2026-08-27 19:40:44 | Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) fails when table owner lacks CONNECT |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2026-08-27 19:31:27 | Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) fails when replica identity index is dropped |