Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2023-04-17 13:50:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So previously, log_newpage_range could only have failed in very
>> unlikely circumstances, whereas now it's not hard to hit when
>> committing a table creation. I wonder what other bugs may be
>> lurking.
> Oh, interesting. We haven't initialized the extra pages added by
> RelationAddExtraBlocks() (in <= 15) for quite a while now, so I'm a bit
> surprised it causes more issues for the VM / FSM. I guess it's that it's quite
> common in real workloads to contend on the extension lock and add extra
> blocks, but not in simple single-threaded tests?
I haven't tried hard to run it to ground, but maybe log_newpage_range
isn't used in that code path? Seems like we'd have detected this
before now if the case were reachable without any crash involved.
regards, tom lane
