pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: A assert failure when initdb with track_commit_timestamp=on
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 17:08:08 +0900
Message-ID: <7547e524-bf5f-45ef-bcbc-59bc55dae8be@oss.nttdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <61810.1751738407@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <87plejmnpy.fsf@163.com>
	<1f8f703d-72e8-4d05-ab16-ff0403a1d19d@oss.nttdata.com>
	<aGXZL0oraweaENrF@paquier.xyz>
	<OSCPR01MB14966207D000875CA4F4C9FEAF543A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
	<87o6u19z9w.fsf@163.com>
	<3694f39a-7148-4197-91fe-25f3d01222b7@oss.nttdata.com>
	<OSCPR01MB1496673E2FC58836331748DB6F542A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
	<efd05511-0b1f-4800-9eca-aadbf9bf5375@oss.nttdata.com>
	<249358.1751643017@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<ac5d452d-7e9d-4643-b9e7-cb3423b04365@oss.nttdata.com>
	<262595.1751649473@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<75d59502-b571-4df8-9269-fd07cee52dd4@oss.nttdata.com>
	<9093.1751736193@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<61810.1751738407@sss.pgh.pa.us>



On 2025/07/06 3:00, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
>>> Or GUC ignore_system_indexes also should be treated in the same way
>>> as transaction_timeout?
> 
>> Yes, I'd say we ought to mark that GUC as don't-accept-in-bootstrap
>> too.  I've not done any research about what other GUCs can break
>> initdb, but now I'm starting to suspect there are several.
> 
> Here's a fleshed-out implementation of Hayato-san's idea.  I've
> not done anything about reverting 5a6c39b6d, nor have I done any
> checks to see if there are other GUCs we ought to mark similarly.
> (But at this point I'd be prepared to bet that there are.)

Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.

Shouldn't we also add a TAP test to verify that initdb works correctly
with GUCs marked as GUC_NOT_IN_BOOTSTRAP?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA Japan Corporation






view thread (28+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <7547e524-bf5f-45ef-bcbc-59bc55dae8be@oss.nttdata.com>
Permalink:  ../7547e524-bf5f-45ef-bcbc-59bc55dae8be@oss.nttdata.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/7547e524-bf5f-45ef-bcbc-59bc55dae8be@oss.nttdata.com

 · 

reply
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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com, zhihuifan1213@163.com, michael@paquier.xyz
  Subject: Re: A assert failure when initdb with track_commit_timestamp=on
  In-Reply-To: <7547e524-bf5f-45ef-bcbc-59bc55dae8be@oss.nttdata.com>

* 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