MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAH2-Wz=4CJK9ysZzbzxBGGTkgAg9ib8cJyCx=9q_d1r8tf0ang@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH2-Wz=4CJK9ysZzbzxBGGTkgAg9ib8cJyCx=9q_d1r8tf0ang@mail.gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2026 16:15:17 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CAA4eK1+pd3T8ULEF6P-9AzpTCdWMG+ciWYopa+9xjj-urEwmRg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hash index bucket split bug
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1%2Bpd3T8ULEF6P-9AzpTCdWMG%2BciWYopa%2B9xjj-urEwmRg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 2:10=E2=80=AFAM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
>
> Both tests are useful in their own way. The regression test runs
> quickly and so might be worth committing alongside the fix -- but it
> depends on leaving behind an incomplete split. The isolation test
> demonstrates that the bug doesn't hinge upon an incomplete split. The
> incomplete split case is particularly nasty, though, because the
> potential for wrong answers persists until an inserter completes the
> split.
>

I am getting following regression diff even after applying the patch:
-step s1_split: <... completed>
 step s2_scan:
     SELECT count(*) FROM hash_split_test
      WHERE v =3D (SELECT k FROM hash_split_key);
@@ -68,3 +67,4 @@
    11
 (1 row)

I will review the code later.

--=20
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.