On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:53 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Thanks for pushing. I have rebased the remaining patches. >
+ * This function performs a full table scan instead of using indexes because + * index scans could miss deleted tuples if an index has been re-indexed or + * re-created during change applications. IIUC, once the tuple is not found during update, the patch does an additional scan with SnapshotAny to find the DEAD tuple, so that it can report update_deleted conflict, if one is found. The reason in the comments to do sequential scan in such cases sound reasonable but I was thinking if we can do index scans if the pg_conflict_* slot's xmin is ahead of the RI (or any usable index that can be used during scan) index_tuple's xmin? Note, we use a similar check with the indcheckxmin parameter in pg_index though the purpose of that is different. If this can happen then still in most cases the index scan will happen. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
