aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/access
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAlvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>2022-01-04 13:01:05 -0300
committerAlvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>2022-01-04 13:01:05 -0300
commitf66885bec0df509ee9b604a83c17dbd7eb9959b1 (patch)
tree2e6ab31728c2661c8076a25d829ed10f6b7df982 /src/backend/access
parent56a3e848c74730cde15278266b757f4262948763 (diff)
downloadpostgresql-f66885bec0df509ee9b604a83c17dbd7eb9959b1.tar.gz
postgresql-f66885bec0df509ee9b604a83c17dbd7eb9959b1.zip
Allow special SKIP LOCKED condition in Assert()
Under concurrency, it is possible for two sessions to be merrily locking and releasing a tuple and marking it again as HEAP_XMAX_INVALID all the while a third session attempts to lock it, miserably fails at it, and then contemplates life, the universe and everything only to eventually fail an assertion that said bit is not set. Before SKIP LOCKED that was indeed a reasonable expectation, but alas! commit df630b0dd5ea falsified it. This bug is as old as time itself, and even older, if you think time begins with the oldest supported branch. Therefore, backpatch to all supported branches. Author: Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANbhV-FeEwMnN8yuMyss7if1ZKjOKfjcgqB26n8pqu1e=q0ebg@mail.gmail.com
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/access')
-rw-r--r--src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c10
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
index 0b4a46b31ba..b0b33072aff 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
@@ -4751,7 +4751,15 @@ failed:
{
Assert(result == TM_SelfModified || result == TM_Updated ||
result == TM_Deleted || result == TM_WouldBlock);
- Assert(!(tuple->t_data->t_infomask & HEAP_XMAX_INVALID));
+
+ /*
+ * When locking a tuple under LockWaitSkip semantics and we fail with
+ * TM_WouldBlock above, it's possible for concurrent transactions to
+ * release the lock and set HEAP_XMAX_INVALID in the meantime. So
+ * this assert is slightly different from the equivalent one in
+ * heap_delete and heap_update.
+ */
+ Assert(TM_WouldBlock || !(tuple->t_data->t_infomask & HEAP_XMAX_INVALID));
Assert(result != TM_Updated ||
!ItemPointerEquals(&tuple->t_self, &tuple->t_data->t_ctid));
tmfd->ctid = tuple->t_data->t_ctid;