On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 at 19:57, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 5:27 AM Rafia Sabih <[email protected]> > wrote: > > So, do you suggest we can have a backpointer of conn also in > active_fsstate...? > > I think that fsstate and active_fsstate have to be pointing to the > same conn_state object. Do you think otherwise? > > No, but I don't understand why you think they can be different in the current implementation. Currently, as per init_scan fsstate->conn_state->active_scan = fsstate, and it is never reassigned or anything. So they cannot have different conn_state. Am I missing something? -- > Robert Haas > EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > -- Regards, Rafia Sabih CYBERTEC PostgreSQL International GmbH
