Hi Michael, On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 6:35 AM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 01:59:01PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote: > > I think this is not a session-level *leak*. The resource owner of > > ongoing txn would take care of the reference once the > > ReorderBufferProcessTXN aborts its internal transaction. Yeah, it > > could be more troublesome if the skipped references keep accumulating > > until the decoding of txn finishes. That said, it's not very clear to > > me whether this code is actually excerised. Can you provide a > > reproducer or a test? > > More to the point, looking at code paths producing XLOG_HEAP_TRUNCATE > records in core, we specifically discard any relation that does not > satisfy RelationIsLogicallyLogged(). > > In short, it is not possible in practice to reach this code at all. > We would do a decoding of the generated record after an historical > snapshot, so something like a SET UNLOGGED should not be seen in > practice.
Thanks for clarifying and confirming it. I think that it does not hurt to be defensive in practice > here, still I am wondering about code outside of core that may play it > unfair, even if the consequences are minimal. Yeah, I agree that this code still seems fragile and better to be harnessed. The code of patch v1 LGTM. -- Regards, Xuneng Zhou HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
