From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 22:36:55 +0100
Message-ID: <202512112014.icpomgc37zx4@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADzfLwV5oQq-Vg_VmG_o4SdL6yHjDoNO4T4pMtgJLzYGmYf74g@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
I just saw a failure in CI for an unrelated patch,
https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/4641105595072512/testrun/build/testrun/injection_points/i...inline patch 1: /home/postgres/postgres/build/testrun/injection_points/isolation/results/reindex-concurrently-upsert.out (+3/-12 lines) download inline-1.patchdiff -U3 /home/postgres/postgres/src/test/modules/injection_points/expected/reindex-concurrently-upsert.out /home/postgres/postgres/build/testrun/injection_points/isolation/results/reindex-concurrently-upsert.out
--- /home/postgres/postgres/src/test/modules/injection_points/expected/reindex-concurrently-upsert.out 2025-12-11 12:41:23.982167232 +0000+++ /home/postgres/postgres/build/testrun/injection_points/isolation/results/reindex-concurrently-upsert.out 2025-12-11 12:45:24.038078804 +0000@@ -62,22 +62,13 @@
(1 row)
step s1_start_upsert: <... completed>
+step s2_start_upsert: <... completed>+step s3_start_reindex: <... completed>
step s4_wakeup_s2:
SELECT injection_points_detach('exec-insert-before-insert-speculative');
SELECT injection_points_wakeup('exec-insert-before-insert-speculative');
-injection_points_detach------------------------- -(1 row)--injection_points_wakeup------------------------- -(1 row)--step s2_start_upsert: <... completed>-step s3_start_reindex: <... completed>+ERROR: could not detach injection point "exec-insert-before-insert-speculative"
starting permutation: s3_setup_wait_before_swap s3_start_reindex s1_start_upsert s4_wakeup_to_swap s2_start_upsert s4_wakeup_s2 s4_wakeup_s1
injection_points_attach
I haven't seen anywhere else. I don't believe this to be a problem in
the patch, because the patch is about partitions and this test case does
not involve partitioned tables -- so I'm inclined to think it's a timing
issue in the test itself. If so, this can probably be fixed with
additional constraints on on of the steps in the permutation ...
probably maybe s2_start_upsert depend on s4_wakeup_s2? But since I
can't easily reproduce this, I have no idea if this is a valid
solution.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@kurilemu.de, mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, noah@leadboat.com
Subject: Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
In-Reply-To: <202512112014.icpomgc37zx4@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox