From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Петър Славов <pet(dot)slavov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Date: | 2022-05-31 19:19:26 |
Message-ID: | 20220531191926.jobl2hvy35d3wdza@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hi,
On 2022-05-31 12:09:04 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:54 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> > On 2022-May-31, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > > This includes a patch from me, to make pruning more robust. It could
> > > technically be a bug in my patch, though a bug revealed by my patch
> > > seems quite possible too.
> >
> > Ah, I see. Well, the explanation that depends on Xmin doesn't apply to
> > this case. I'm not saying there are no bugs in the other two commits,
> > just that such bug(s) have a different explanation, so it makes sense to
> > revert separately.
>
> The assertion failure takes place in heapam_index_build_range_scan(),
> at the point that it is called by amcheck itself -- during an
> opportunistic prune that occurs in passing. This is the specific
> assertion that fails:
>
> https://github.com/x4m/postgres_g/blob/09d76bdc2528b476ef2f04c793061dcbf23372b5/src/backend/access/heap/pruneheap.c#L762
I don't think that assertion is correct.
Consider transactions aborting concurrently with heap pruning. You could have
done a HTSV for one chain element, a concurrent abort happened, then you did
the HTSV for another chain element. If the HTSVs were not in the order of the
HOT chain you could see HEAPTUPLE_DEAD for an earlier chain element, while
seeing HEAPTUPLE_INSERT_IN_PROGRESS in a later one. There's several other
scenarios with subtransaction aborts as well, I think.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-05-31 19:34:50 | Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-05-31 19:09:04 | Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY |