| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | dx k9 <bitsandbytes88(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: reindexdb hangs |
| Date: | 2007-09-11 00:20:12 |
| Message-ID: | 1367.1189470012@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> I am unsure if I should backpatch to 8.1: the code in cluster.c has
> changed, and while it is relatively easy to modify the patch, this is a
> rare bug and nobody has reported it in CLUSTER (not many people clusters
> temp tables, it seems). Should I patch only REINDEX? How far back?
I'd say go as far back as you can conveniently modify the patch for.
This is a potential data-loss bug (even if only for temporary data)
so we ought to take it seriously.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-11 01:54:05 | Re: Close open transactions soon to avoid wraparound problems |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-09-10 22:07:00 | Re: reindexdb hangs |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-11 01:04:45 | "txn" in pg_stat_activity |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-09-10 22:44:45 | Re: A Silly Idea for Vertically-Oriented Databases |