Re: pgsql: Comments in IndexBuildHeapScan describe

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Comments in IndexBuildHeapScan describe
Date: 2006-03-27 20:18:53
Message-ID: 1143490733.3839.205.camel@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 19:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Comments in IndexBuildHeapScan describe the indexing of recently-dead
> tuples as needed "to keep VACUUM from complaining", but actually there is
> a more compelling reason to do it: failure to do so violates MVCC semantics.
> This is because a pre-existing serializable transaction might try to use
> the index after we finish (re)building it, and it might fail to find tuples
> it should be able to see. We got this mostly right, but not in the case
> of partial indexes: the code mistakenly discarded recently-dead tuples for
> partial indexes. Fix that, and adjust the comments.
>
> Tags:
> ----
> REL8_1_STABLE
>
> Modified Files:
> --------------
> pgsql/src/backend/catalog:
> index.c (r1.261.2.1 -> r1.261.2.2)
> (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/catalog/index.c.diff?r1=1.261.2.1&r2=1.261.2.2)

Well spotted...

I notice the same error occurs in REL8_0_STABLE, REL7_4_STABLE and
REL7_3_STABLE. This is a data loss bug, so why not back apply to those
releases also?

Best Regards, Simon Riggs

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-27 20:46:02 Re: pgsql: Comments in IndexBuildHeapScan describe
Previous Message User Ksrikanth 2006-03-27 19:15:41 bizgres - bizgres: Introduce release Release-0_9_1