Re: Inval reliability, especially for inplace updates

On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 09:48:48AM -0800, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 4:24 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 04:19:02PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > Thanks for the review.
> >
> > > The attached version doesn't need a comprehensive re-review, but I'd
> > > particularly value hearing about any places where you find it's reducing
> > > comprehensibility rather than enhancing.
> >
> > I'd like to get this into the back branches well in advance of the 2026-02
> > releases, in case the buildfarm catches some defect at low probability.  If
> > there are no objections in the next week, I'll proceed that way.
> 
> I'm happy with these new comments. The explanation in
> heap_inplace_lock before calling CacheInvalidateHeapTupleInplace is a
> lot better I think. And removing the last param means there is less to
> think about.

I pushed the patch bundle to v17-v14.  Thanks for the reviews!  The
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=dragonet&dt=2025-12-17%2001%3A34%3A36
"double free or corruption (!prev)" likely witnessed a defect in how I
back-patched this to v14.  I am looking into it.