MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <18158-88f667028dbc7e7b@postgresql.org>
 <58b5d6bf-7dca-41e5-8000-e12981205ada@gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7XdDoLAoLKo7pOHmSqHniHf46Pw8Z=iqNx2uYi4J5ixBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <agQgZKF6q3rYRX7O@paquier.xyz>
In-Reply-To: <agQgZKF6q3rYRX7O@paquier.xyz>
From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 15:19:34 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CABPTF7VgzdBP_ZPKf2eZ79ry0fVKzcgCkB5gy60HGXCy0EQb0w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #18158: Assert in pgstat_report_stat() fails when a backend
 shutting down with stats pending
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7VgzdBP_ZPKf2eZ79ry0fVKzcgCkB5gy60HGXCy0EQb0w%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 2:55=E2=80=AFPM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xy=
z> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 08:46:25AM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> > Thanks for reporting this. It appears like backpatching an equivalent
> > of 87a6690cc69 to REL_17/REL_16 would resolve this issue.
>
> FWIW, I fear such a change in the stable branches based on its
> invasiveness, particularly because the area of the code dealing with
> shutdown sequences has been reworked a lot lately as far as I recall.
>
> I am seriously wondering if we should just let it go and remove the
> assertion on v15~v17.  It's not perfect, of course, but I value much
> more this assertion in terms of any future work that can be done with
> pgstats, not in terms of what we could detect for bug fixes.

I agree that applying the change wholesale could be too invasive. If
we decide not to address the ordering issue, removing this assertion
seems reasonable, since the non-assert path does not actually provide
the required guarantee.

--=20
Regards,
Xuneng Zhou
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.