On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 4:11 PM Mark Dilger <mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > A similar assertion can still be reached on HEAD using the attached (rather > contrived) regression test as of f60420cff66a9089a9b431f9c07f4a29aae4990a:
I independently found the same bug just a few hours ago, using an enhanced version of my python fuzzing script (posted to the main skip scan thread) that now performs backwards scans. I'm not at all surprised to see that your repro also uses ORDER BY ... DESC. Would you post to that other thread going forward, rather than posting to this -committers thread? I'm going to talk about this on the main skip scan -hackers thread, when I have a proper fix. I already have a fix for the issue that you reported, but there seems to be an independent remaining issue with backwards scans that I haven't quite got to the bottom of just yet. Thanks -- Peter Geoghegan
