Re: [BUGS] Segfault 11 on PG10 with max_parallel_workers_per_gather>3
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] Segfault 11 on PG10 with max_parallel_workers_per_gather>3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqQMo5u6UOyEUZBqC4GqM-dquGfaBkuD_Q3HPo+TduQYiw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] Segfault 11 on PG10 with max_parallel_workers_per_gather>3 (Stefan Tzeggai <tzeggai@empirica-systeme.de>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Stefan Tzeggai <tzeggai@empirica-systeme.de> wrote: > Am 08.11.2017 um 14:24 schrieb Dilip Kumar: >> By looking at the plan it seems like the issue what got fixed in below > commit. >>> >> Author: Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> 2017-10-14 00:23:28 >> Committer: Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> 2017-10-14 00:35:14 >> Parent: d48bf6a94d295c3779c6af4df118d95a6606192f (Fix AggGetAggref() >> so it won't lie to aggregate final functions.) >> Child: cb591fcbfbba1df6fda1839ece53665e85e491e3 (Restore nodeAgg.c's >> ability to check for improperly-nested aggregates.) >> Branch: remotes/origin/REL_10_STABLE >> Follows: REL_10_0 >> Precedes: REL_10_1 >> >> Fix possible crash with Parallel Bitmap Heap Scan. >> >> If a Parallel Bitmap Heap scan's chain of leftmost descendents >> includes a BitmapOr whose first child is a BitmapAnd, the prior coding >> would mistakenly create a non-shared TIDBitmap and then try to perform >> shared iteration. >> >> Report by Tomas Vondra. Patch by Dilip Kumar. > > Do I understand it correctly, that that fix would be released with 10.1 > tomorrow (according to https://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap/) > and I could then test it? Yes, this commit is included in 10.1. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: