Re: BUG #16285: bt_metap fails with value is out of range for typeinteger
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #16285: bt_metap fails with value is out of range for typeinteger |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200310002233.y3dptcfr5lwpjvla@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #16285: bt_metap fails with value is out of range for type integer (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #16285: bt_metap fails with value is out of range for type integer
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, On 2020-03-09 17:16:47 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:36 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > What do you mean? Since 12 is the newest release affected, we'd > > potentially (and with increasing likelihood due to clusters living > > longer) have the problem till 12 is not supported anymore. What am I > > missing? > > But 12 isn't the latest release affected. It just so happens that > Victor was using 12, but oldest_xact was actually added by commit > 857f9c36 -- that's Postgres 11. Huh? I think we might be miscommunicating here. My point isn't about the *earliest* release affected, it's about the *latest* version without a fix. IOW, until when is there a supported release without a fix. And once 12 is not supported anymore, 11 is also unsupported. So we'd have a live bug (which would mainly hit while investigating issues) until 12 is unsupported? > To be very precise: I imagine that Victor was using bt_metap() in > production on a Postgres 12 installation because he wanted to make > sure that his installation had the new stuff (he did a talk about it > at EU, so clearly it's of interest to him). The problem is > nevertheless not new to Postgres 12. > > > I'd just do the s/%u/%d/. > > That's a pretty gross hack. So be it. Yea, it is. > > pg_class.relpages is also reported as a signed integer :(. Since > > btm_root/fastroot use %d, it'll just have similar wrapping behaviour. > > I guess that means that pageinspect was correct after all! Well, for some value of correct. I was arguing quite a while ago that we should just make pg_class.relpages a 64bit integer, or introduce an sql level type for block numbers. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: