Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY
| От | Peter Geoghegan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAH2-Wz=eJnkcLpgDhHzU=vz5Fu58HJxJB_Gt094Mx_L+6rD3_A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #17485: Records missing from Primary Key index when doing REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 6:20 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > And I observe that commenting out condition in following code fixes the test. > > //if (!(statusFlags & PROC_IN_SAFE_IC)) > > h->data_oldest_nonremovable = > > TransactionIdOlder(h->data_oldest_nonremovable, xmin); > > Well, by doing so, I think that you are just making the CIC/REINDEX > wait again until the index is safe to use, but we want to skip this > wait as of the optimization done in d9d0762. Uh...isn't that exactly the point that Andrey made himself, in posting the snippet? You seem to be addressing this PROC_IN_SAFE_IC snippet as if Andrey formally proposed it as a bugfix, which seems like an odd interpretation to me. It seems pretty clear to me that Andrey was just making an observation, in case it helped with debugging. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: