Re: First-draft release notes for next week's releases

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> To me that looks sufficient to trigger the bug, because we're issuing a
> wal record about the row that was passed to heap_lock_update(), not the
> latest one in the ctid chain. When replaying that record, it will reset
> the t_ctid field, thus breaking the chain.

[ scratches head ... ]  If that's what's happening, isn't it a bug in
itself?  Surely the WAL record ought to point at the tuple that was
locked.
        regards, tom lane