BRIN: fix bug in xlog backup block counting
The code that generates the BRIN_XLOG_UPDATE removes the buffer reference when the page that's target for the updated tuple is freshly initialized. This is a pretty usual optimization, but was breaking the case where the revmap buffer, which is referenced in the same WAL record, is getting a backup block: the replay code was using backup block index 1, which is not valid when the update target buffer gets pruned; the revmap buffer gets assigned 0 instead. Make sure to use the correct backup block index for revmap when replaying. Bug reported by Fujii Masao.
This commit is contained in:
parent
c8df9477f8
commit
a590f266e4
@ -60,9 +60,11 @@ brin_xlog_insert_update(XLogRecPtr lsn, XLogRecord *record,
|
|||||||
*/
|
*/
|
||||||
if (record->xl_info & XLOG_BRIN_INIT_PAGE)
|
if (record->xl_info & XLOG_BRIN_INIT_PAGE)
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
XLogReadBufferForRedoExtended(lsn, record, 0,
|
/*
|
||||||
xlrec->node, MAIN_FORKNUM, blkno,
|
* No full-page image here. Don't try to read it, because there
|
||||||
RBM_ZERO, false, &buffer);
|
* might be one for the revmap buffer, below.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
buffer = XLogReadBuffer(xlrec->node, blkno, true);
|
||||||
page = BufferGetPage(buffer);
|
page = BufferGetPage(buffer);
|
||||||
brin_page_init(page, BRIN_PAGETYPE_REGULAR);
|
brin_page_init(page, BRIN_PAGETYPE_REGULAR);
|
||||||
action = BLK_NEEDS_REDO;
|
action = BLK_NEEDS_REDO;
|
||||||
@ -97,7 +99,9 @@ brin_xlog_insert_update(XLogRecPtr lsn, XLogRecord *record,
|
|||||||
UnlockReleaseBuffer(buffer);
|
UnlockReleaseBuffer(buffer);
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
/* update the revmap */
|
/* update the revmap */
|
||||||
action = XLogReadBufferForRedo(lsn, record, 1, xlrec->node,
|
action = XLogReadBufferForRedo(lsn, record,
|
||||||
|
record->xl_info & XLOG_BRIN_INIT_PAGE ? 0 : 1,
|
||||||
|
xlrec->node,
|
||||||
xlrec->revmapBlk, &buffer);
|
xlrec->revmapBlk, &buffer);
|
||||||
if (action == BLK_NEEDS_REDO)
|
if (action == BLK_NEEDS_REDO)
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user