From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: exclusion@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:54:09 +0900
Message-ID: <ZnTdQW2ne9m10zXf@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3050563.1718580646@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <18499-8a519c280f956480@postgresql.org>
<428421.1717887173@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3030961.1718570047@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3045795.1718578372@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<Zm90GkbGq16gjJy0@paquier.xyz>
<3050563.1718580646@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 07:30:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right. I was thinking that CIC wouldn't reach spginsert(), rather
> spgbuild(), but it does feel a bit rickety. A separate flag would
> be better.
Why does it feel rickety for you? We already rely on this flag so it
does not seem like a huge problem to rely on it again for the sake of
this index AM.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
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-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, exclusion@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18499: Reindexing spgist index concurrently triggers Assert("TransactionIdIsValid(state->myXid)")
In-Reply-To: <ZnTdQW2ne9m10zXf@paquier.xyz>
* 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