Re: Failures in constraints regression test, "read only 0 of 8192 bytes"
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Failures in constraints regression test, "read only 0 of 8192 bytes" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e9847a44-8f69-483f-92dc-5a2ca0a8be59@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Failures in constraints regression test, "read only 0 of 8192 bytes" (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Failures in constraints regression test, "read only 0 of 8192 bytes"
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/03/2024 22:59, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 9:30 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: >> Barring objections, I'll commit the attached. > > +1 Pushed, thanks! > I guess the comment for smgrreleaseall() could also be updated. It > mentions only PROCSIGNAL_BARRIER_SMGRRELEASE, but I think sinval > overflow (InvalidateSystemCaches()) should also be mentioned? I removed that comment; people can grep to find the callers. >> Hmm, I'm not sure if we need even smgrreleaseall() here anymore. It's >> not required for correctness AFAICS. We don't do it in single-rel >> invalidation in RelationCacheInvalidateEntry() either. > > I think we do, because we have missed sinval messages. It's unlikely > but a relfilenode might have been recycled, and we might have file > descriptors that point to the unlinked files. That is, there are new > files with the same names and we need to open those ones. Gotcha. -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: