Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190909140549.od4cjv5adnqxzdzx@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, On 2019-09-05 12:59:11 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > Did a good bit more comment polishing, renamed a few more variables. Pushed now, after some more polishing. > I also added tests for things that I thought were clearly missing > (including a test that errors out before the code changes in the > patch). For 12, I had to replace the NOTICE with WARNING (including SET client_min_messages). I wonder if we ought to backpatch commit ebd49928215e3854d91167e798949a75b34958d0 Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: 2019-07-27 15:59:57 -0400 Don't drop NOTICE messages in isolation tests. to avoid backpatching pain? > I tried for a while to develop one for mark/restore of IndexOnlyScans, > but I concluded that that code is basically dead right now. Every scan > node of a normal that gets modified or needs a rowmark implies having > ctid as part of the targetlist. And we neither allow ctid to be part of > index definitions, nor understand that we actually kinda know the ctid > from within the index scan (HOT would make using the tid hard). So the > relevant code in nodeIndexOnly.c seems dead? I wonder if, on master, we should make ExecIndexOnlyMarkPos(), ExecIndexOnlyRestrPos() ERROR out in case they're hit for an EPQ relation, given that they ought to be unreachable. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: