From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | yi huang <yi(dot)codeplayer(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report |
Date: | 2019-09-09 14:20:27 |
Message-ID: | 28984.1568038827@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-09-05 12:59:11 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I tried for a while to develop one for mark/restore of IndexOnlyScans,
>> but I concluded that that code is basically dead right now. Every scan
>> node of a normal that gets modified or needs a rowmark implies having
>> ctid as part of the targetlist. And we neither allow ctid to be part of
>> index definitions, nor understand that we actually kinda know the ctid
>> from within the index scan (HOT would make using the tid hard). So the
>> relevant code in nodeIndexOnly.c seems dead?
> I wonder if, on master, we should make ExecIndexOnlyMarkPos(),
> ExecIndexOnlyRestrPos() ERROR out in case they're hit for an EPQ
> relation, given that they ought to be unreachable.
I'd vote against. The chain of reasoning that says they're unreachable
is long and involves mostly code that's nowhere near there, so when/if
somebody made a change that broke that reasoning, they'd not necessarily
notice that the ERROR has to be undone.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2019-09-09 18:33:19 | BUG #15997: PgManager giving error while looking a table with PgV12 |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-09-09 14:05:49 | Re: PostgreSQL12 crash bug report |