From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org,
        Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Reorder EPQ work,
 to fix rowmark related bugs and improve effici
In-reply-to: <C7955344-A83A-442F-8CE8-EFBEB5E024B1@anarazel.de>
References: <E1i7IqC-0000Uc-5H@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <CA+hUKG+9pN3=4Tw=mdPVkT86MB-04TED-hieY7ue8xL6gHkmAw@mail.gmail.com>
 <C7955344-A83A-442F-8CE8-EFBEB5E024B1@anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Mon, 09 Sep 2019 22:55:56 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <7215.1568066488.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 18:01:28 -0400
Message-ID: <7216.1568066488@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On September 9, 2019 10:51:26 PM GMT+01:00, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@g=
mail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:32 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
>> Did this cause the following failure in eval-plan-qual on
>> REL_12_STABLE?
>> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=3Dprairiedog&dt=
=3D2019-09-09%2019%3A08%3A41

Just saw that :-(

> Argh, yes, probably. But it's just isolationtester I think, not a backed=
 bug. Need to backport the recent fix in master to at least 12.
> Tom, do you think we should backpatch both the order fix and the notice =
improvement, or just the former? And to which version?

I think the first question is why is only prairiedog showing this.
Let's not panic until we understand that.

prairiedog looks to be about 20 minutes away from finishing the
isolation tests for master, so that will be a useful data point
as to whether there's any 12/HEAD difference.  I'll dig deeper
as soon as that run finishes.

			regards, tom lane