> On Jul 6, 2021, at 2:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > > It looks like amcheck's verify_heapam.c functionality almost catches > bugs like this one. Something for Mark (CC'd) to consider. Does it > matter that we usually "ctx.oldest_xid = ctx.relfrozenxid", and so > usually use pg_class.relfrozenxid as our oldest_xid (and not > ShmemVariableCache->oldestXid)? In other words, could we be doing more > to sanitize ShmemVariableCache->oldestXid, especially when the > relation's pg_class.relfrozenxid happens to be set to a real XID? Thanks, Peter, for drawing my attention to this. I had already been following this thread, but had not yet thought about the problem in terms of amcheck. I will investigate possible solutions in verify_heapam(). — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- RE: visibility map corruption Floris Van Nee
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- RE: visibility map corruption Floris Van Nee
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Tom Lane
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Mark Dilger
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Peter Geoghegan
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian
- Re: visibility map corruption Justin Pryzby
- Re: visibility map corruption Bruce Momjian