From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently |
Date: | 2023-02-14 12:05:35 |
Message-ID: | CAEZATCUszwWmc+d_rid5sB8k72S-V-DFbmKBDmQgHZj8RH6w_w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 at 11:29, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that the location of the initialization is best. My first
> impulse was to add it in line 3618, with the "Set global context" lines;
> but then I think it's possible for one tuple of a partition to be routed
> correctly and a later one that is concurrently updated suffer from an
> improper value in cpUpdateRetrySlot.
>
Hmm, shouldn't it be initialised in ExecMergeMatched(), before line
2896, making the CMD_DELETE case match the CMD_UPDATE case? Otherwise
maybe an update action could be matched initially, try a
cross-partition update, setting cpUpdateRetrySlot due to a concurrent
update, and then upon retrying, a delete action might match.
Regards,
Dean
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Bluce | 2023-02-14 12:51:33 | Re: BUG #17782: ERROR: variable not found in subplan target lists |
Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2023-02-14 12:00:00 | Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently |