Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hK8I8-0003cG-Mk for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:21:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hK8I7-0006Xg-Bh for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:21:55 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hK8I7-0006XZ-4C for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:21:55 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hK8I4-0002J1-Vk for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:21:54 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x3QLLktV009195; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:21:46 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Amit Langote cc: Alvaro Herrera , Amit Langote , Michael Paquier , jianingy.yang@gmail.com, PostgreSQL mailing lists , Pg Hackers Subject: Re: BUG #15672: PostgreSQL 11.1/11.2 crashed after dropping a partition table In-reply-to: <9943.1556305069@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <20190426153921.GA22956@alvherre.pgsql> <9943.1556305069@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane message dated "Fri, 26 Apr 2019 14:57:49 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <9193.1556313706.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:21:46 -0400 Message-ID: <9194.1556313706@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk I went ahead and pushed the stopgap patches, along with regression tests based on yours. The tests show the current (i.e. wrong) behavior for index comment and relfilenode reuse. I think that whenever we fix that, we can just adjust the expected output instead of adding more tests. regards, tom lane