Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmobh6b+8Kg2P0J__ML5KDh8bJwNYZvWED_oPB=MnBaqoWQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae
Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae Re: relfrozenxid may disagree with row XIDs after 1ccc1e05ae |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, I propose to remove this open item from https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_17_Open_Items On the original thread (BUG #17257), Alexander Lakhin says that he can't reproduce this after dad1539ae/18b87b201. Based on my analysis of the code, I suspect that there is a residual bug, or at least that there was one prior to 6f47f6883151366c031cd6fd4011e66d2c702a90. (On the other thread, I cited 6dbb490261a6170a3fc3e326c6983ad63e795047, but that's not really what I meant.) But this code is too hairy for me to be certain whether there's a bug or not without some kind of a test case, and six weeks after the open item was added, we still don't have one that works on any v16 commit, either before or after the one named in the subject line. I hate to leave a potential data-corrupting bug unaddressed, but under present circumstances, I find it hard to justify spending more time on this. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: