Horton

Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently

Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Alexey Ermakov <alexey.ermakov@dataegret.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com>, "PostgreSQL mailing lists" <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Date: 2021-12-08T04:29:35Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs 
On 12/7/21, 6:48 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:04:54PM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> For example, could holding the locks longer impact performance?
>
> Do you have anything particular in mind?  It seems to me that this
> boils down to the same lock taken on the parent table based on its
> RTE.

I don't have anything concrete in mind.

>> I think it would be good to expand the comments above these changes to
>> explain why we are keeping the lock.  That might help avoid similar
>> problems in the future.
>
> Yes, I have added a note, and applied the patch after looking at it
> again this morning.  The test cannot be used in 12 so I have removed
> it from REL_12_STABLE, as allow_system_table_mods is a PGC_POSTMASTER
> there.

Great!

Nathan

Commits

  1. Fix corruption of toast indexes with REINDEX CONCURRENTLY