From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
    "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
    Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133@gmail.com>,
    Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>,
    Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>,
    Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
    Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
In-reply-to: <18181295-8375-4789-ad32-269d78d6001e@gmail.com>
References: <202604072027.gazfa2zt2l2j@alvherre.pgsql>
 <a38fc771-c860-4605-8c44-d16e8aff2534@gmail.com>
 <121156.1775818667@localhost>
 <18181295-8375-4789-ad32-269d78d6001e@gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
   message dated "Sun, 12 Apr 2026 17:00:00 +0300."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 11:42:03 +0200
Message-ID: <182883.1776073323@localhost>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/182883.1776073323%40localhost>
Precedence: bulk

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain

Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've stumbled upon one more issue with this feature:
> CREATE TABLE t (i int PRIMARY KEY);
> REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) t;
> 
> fails for me with sanitizers enabled and
> min_dynamic_shared_memory = '1GB'
> in postgresql.conf as below:
> 2026-04-12 13:23:02.000 UTC [2733633] LOG:  statement: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) t;
> repack.c:3373:15: runtime error: load of value 240, which is not a valid value for type '_Bool'
>     #0 0x6441f7eba454 in start_repack_decoding_worker .../src/backend/commands/repack.c:3373
>     #1 0x6441f7ebdaad in rebuild_relation .../src/backend/commands/repack.c:1010
>     #2 0x6441f7ebe9a2 in cluster_rel .../src/backend/commands/repack.c:656
>     #3 0x6441f7ebefea in process_single_relation .../src/backend/commands/repack.c:2359
>     #4 0x6441f7ebf870 in ExecRepack .../src/backend/commands/repack.c:296
>     #5 0x6441f886f20e in standard_ProcessUtility .../src/backend/tcop/utility.c:867

I could not reproduce the problem, but noticed that the field is not
initialized correctly. Please confirm that 0001 should fix that.

While working on it, I noticed that one field can be removed from
DecodingWorkerShared - 0002 removes that.

-- 
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com


--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-diff
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename=0001-Add-missing-initialization.patch