Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")
Дата
Msg-id 3050563.1718580646@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Ответы Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 06:52:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... not sure there's a nice way for spginsert() to know whether it's
>> being invoked in REINDEX CONCURRENTLY or a normal INSERT/UPDATE
>> query.  Can we trust indexInfo->ii_Concurrent for that?

> I am not sure to understand the redirection part for spgist, but
> except if I am missing something, we already rely on ii_Concurrent for
> other index AMs like BRIN paths to check if we are dealing with a
> concurrent build path or not.  index_concurrently_build() is used
> by both CIC and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY, where the flag is set after a
> BuildIndexInfo().

Right.  I was thinking that CIC wouldn't reach spginsert(), rather
spgbuild(), but it does feel a bit rickety.  A separate flag would
be better.

On the whole I'm inclined to stick with the patch as I have it.
Maybe somebody would like to investigate this idea as an improvement
for v18 or later.

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: error "can only drop stats once" brings down database
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #18483: Segmentation fault in tests modules