From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Karina Litskevich <litskevichkarina(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | 王海洋 <wanghaiyang(dot)001(at)bytedance(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] BUG FIX: inconsistent page found in BRIN_REGULAR_PAGE |
Date: | 2022-12-23 16:35:09 |
Message-ID: | 20221223163509.rwxpzy6xfemppkxd@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hello,
On 2022-Dec-23, Karina Litskevich wrote:
> Is there any special reason to read WAL records until the last inserted
> record?
Hmm, no, there's no good reason to do it that way.
> It seems that in some rare situations on slower machines this test can fail.
> If any background process inserts a WAL record before lsn('insert')
> and this record isn't flushed before
> pg_get_wal_records_info('$start_lsn', '$end_lsn'),
> pg_get_wal_records_info('$start_lsn', '$end_lsn') ends with ERROR
> "cannot accept future end LSN" as it works only if record with end LSN
> is inserted.
Hmm. I've never seen that, but it sounds plausible.
> I attached two patches with two ways of fixing this minor issue.
> -my $end_lsn = $whiskey->lsn('insert');
> +my $end_lsn = $whiskey->lsn('flush');
Thank you, I used this one.
Regards
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2022-12-23 17:09:18 | BUG #17730: Trigger Issue |
Previous Message | Karina Litskevich | 2022-12-23 13:54:56 | [PATCH] BUG FIX: inconsistent page found in BRIN_REGULAR_PAGE |