Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Alexey Ermakov <alexey(dot)ermakov(at)dataegret(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maxim Boguk <maxim(dot)boguk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Subject: Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently
Date: 2021-11-09 03:56:24
Message-ID: 20211109035624.GA940092@rfd.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 12:36:41PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> One possible way to fix this would be to make ReindexRelationConcurrently()
> acquire a lock on the underlying table when reindexing a toast table. Another
> to not release the lock in toast_save_datum().

The latter is more future-proof. Does it have material disadvantages?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-11-09 04:37:58 Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-11-08 20:36:41 Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently