Message-ID: <75d59502-b571-4df8-9269-fd07cee52dd4@oss.nttdata.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2025 01:57:36 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: A assert failure when initdb with track_commit_timestamp=on
Content-Language: en-US
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
 Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>, 'Michael Paquier' <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
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>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
In-Reply-To: <262595.1751649473@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/75d59502-b571-4df8-9269-fd07cee52dd4%40oss.nttdata.com>
Precedence: bulk


On 2025/07/05 2:17, Tom Lane wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
>> On 2025/07/05 0:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> As I remarked in the other thread, I don't like inventing a different
>>> solution for each GUC.  So if there are even two that need something
>>> done, I think Hayato-san's idea has merit.
> 
>> This code seems to assume that the processing mode is switched to bootstrap before
>> GUC parameters are processed. But is that actually the case?
> 
> Oh, good point.  But there doesn't seem to be any ill effect from
> making BootstrapModeMain set BootstrapProcessing a bit earlier.

Maybe. But I noticed that your patch also moves the line "IgnoreSystemIndexes = true;"
earlier. Why did you make this change?

This could cause initdb to fail with a PANIC error when run with ignore_system_indexes=off,
like this:

     $ initdb -D data -c ignore_system_indexes=off
     ...
     FATAL:  could not open relation with OID 2703
     PANIC:  cannot abort transaction 1, it was already committed

So perhaps "IgnoreSystemIndexes = true;" should be placed after GUCs are processed?
Or GUC ignore_system_indexes also should be treated in the same way
as transaction_timeout?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA Japan Corporation