Re: BUG #19006: Assert(BufferIsPinned) in BufferGetBlockNumber() is triggered for forwarded buffer
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #19006: Assert(BufferIsPinned) in BufferGetBlockNumber() is triggered for forwarded buffer |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGJTDW+wfcbbK=YMjBnsngQvf=TdjzLN7QmsKbpHPoaGEQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #19006: Assert(BufferIsPinned) in BufferGetBlockNumber() is triggered for forwarded buffer (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #19006: Assert(BufferIsPinned) in BufferGetBlockNumber() is triggered for forwarded buffer
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 12:22 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > With all these comments and b421223172a2 already applied, are you sure > that it is a good idea to play with the v18 branch more than > necessary? We are in a baked beta2 state, and it looks like all these > could qualify as HEAD-only improvements. Yeah, b421223172a2 closes the known bug and thus the critical path item for 18. I am happy to propose this patch as an improvement for master, and I am not aware of remaining bugs in this area in v18. I just wanted to publish the patch with analysis ASAP once the existing read_stream.c/bufmgr.c interaction began to seem egregiously suboptimal to me and I saw what to do about, having addressed the bug with a low risk patch as a first priority. That keeps the options open, even if not very wide given the date: on the off-chance that others think the status quo isn't good enough and perhaps the fragility of the existing API is actually riskier than the bigger change, at least there's a patch on the table to discuss. I have no plans to take any action without such a consensus. > Perhaps the open item can be closed then? Done.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: