On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Michael Paquier >> <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:11 AM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote: >>>> I would prefer not to bump it to the next CF unless we decide this will >>>> not get fixed for 9.6. >>> >>> It may make sense to add that to the list of open items for 9.6 >>> instead. That's not a feature. >> >> So I have moved this patch to the next CF for now, and will work on >> fixing it rather soonishly as an effort to stabilize 9.6 as well as >> back-branches. > > Well, not that soon at the end, but I am back on that... I have not > completely reviewed all the code yet, and the case of index relation > referring to a relation optimized with truncate is still broken, but > for now here is a rebased patch if people are interested. I am going > to get as well a TAP tests out of my pocket to ease testing.
The patch I sent yesterday was based on an incorrect version. Attached is a slightly-modified version of the last one I found here (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56b342f5.1050...@iki.fi), which is rebased on HEAD at ed0b228. I have also converted the test case script of upthread into a TAP test in src/test/recovery that covers 3 cases and I included that in the patch: 1) CREATE + INSERT + COPY => crash 2) CREATE + trigger + COPY => crash 3) CREATE + TRUNCATE + COPY => incorrect number of rows. The first two tests make the system crash, the third one reports an incorrect number of rows. This is registered in next CF by the way: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/528/ Thoughts? -- Michael
fix-wal-level-minimal-michael-2.patch
Description: invalid/octet-stream
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
