| From: | Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bt_index_parent_check and concurrently build indexes |
| Date: | 2024-12-12 23:59:16 |
| Message-ID: | CANtu0oiuS23+DZVhS_Q=GuFY+qgU46NWsf5juULX_yYKNVx7=Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, Andrey!
> Interesting bug. It's amazing how long it stand, giving that it would be
triggered by almost any check after updating a table.
Probably because in real cases, bt_index_check is used much more frequently
than bt_index_parent_check.
> From my POV correct fix direction is to use approach similar to index
building.
> E.i. remove "if (!state->readonly)" check. Are there any known downsides
of this?
Yes, it also looks correct to me. I have attached the patch with such
changes.
Also, I have registered a commit fest entry for the issue:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/51/5438/
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-amcheck-Fix-bt_index_parent_check-behavior-with-C.patch | application/octet-stream | 8.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-12-13 00:02:45 | Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-12-12 23:33:04 | IANA timezone abbreviations versus timezone_abbreviations |