| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alexey Ermakov <alexey(dot)ermakov(at)dataegret(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maxim Boguk <maxim(dot)boguk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently |
| Date: | 2021-11-11 09:09:49 |
| Message-ID: | YYzd3dsYi/LiwWuc@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 10:42:17PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 10:31:19PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2021-11-08 21:46:25 -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> Doing both sounds harmless. Regarding REINDEX CONCURRENTLY on a system
>>> catalog, I bet that can still reach bugs even if we do both, considering this:
>>
>> Normal catalog aren't REINDEX CONCURRENTLY. It's just toast tables that are
>> kind of system-y, but also kind of not, that can be reindexed concurrently.
>
> Oh, okay.
To be clear on this point, users cannot reindex concurrently catalog
indexes and toast indexes associated to catalog tables, just toast
indexes of normal tables. I don't know if any of you have been
working on a patch, but I was cooking something. It would be worth
checking if an isolation test could be written.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew J. Schorr | 2021-11-11 15:08:23 | pgdg-redhat-repo-42.0-20.noarch is missing pgdg14-source and pgdg13-source |
| Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2021-11-11 09:08:41 | BUG #17281: How specify regress database? |