Re: Concerns about this release

Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> writes:

> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I trust lazy VACUUM a lot *more* than I trust the old VACUUM code.
> > Read the tuple-chain-moving logic in vacuum.c sometime, and then tell me
> > how confident you feel in it. (My gut tells me that that logic is
> > responsible for the recent reports of duplicate tuples in 7.1.*, though
> > I can't yet back this up with any evidence.)
>
> For all the various bugs which have been in PG over the years, the
> recent crop of "duplicate tuples" is the absolute scariest. Can a
> release really be made without knowing precisely the cause of those
> corruptions? The various theories offered by the posters (SMP
> machine, CREATE INDEX in pl/pgsql functions, etc.) aren't comforting
> either. To me, all other feature enhancements pale in comparison to
> pinning down this bug.

The one instance of the bug that has been definitely pinned down
involved the old VACUUM code in 7.1.3 (plus a don't-do-that-then index
function).

-Doug
--
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees.
--T. J. Jackson, 1863