Horton

Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-30T19:11:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-04-30 14:41:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think trying to get this "working" is a v13 task now.  We've obviously
>> never tried to stress the case before, so you're neither fixing a
>> regression nor fixing a new-in-v12 issue.

> Well, the test *do* test that a previously existing all-branches bug
> doesn't exist, no (albeit one just triggering an assert)?  I'm not
> talking about making this concurrency safe, just about whether it's
> possible to somehow keep the tests.

Well, I told you what I thought was a safe way to run the tests.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Remove reindex_catalog test from test schedules.

  2. Remove RelationSetIndexList().

  3. Fix reindexing of pg_class indexes some more.

  4. Run catalog reindexing test from 3dbb317d32 serially, to avoid deadlocks.

  5. Fix potential assertion failure when reindexing a pg_class index.

  6. Fix several recently introduced issues around handling new relation forks.

  7. Avoid VACUUM FULL altogether in initdb.

  8. Introduce replication progress tracking infrastructure.

  9. initdb: remove unnecessary VACUUM FULL