On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 7:38 PM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 06:06:25PM -0400, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > This is *probably* only a bug on master, since only master has commit > > 9c9ddf109, which taught gistkillitems to run against a single-page > > GiST index. However, we don't correctly reset the state on a rescan in > > any version, which seems dicey even without commit 9c9ddf109. > > My buildfarm member batta is running recovery test 027 with > wal_consistency_checking, with: > PG_TEST_EXTRA => "regress_dump_restore wal_consistency_checking saslprep",
Did you intend to respond to the nearby thread about wal_consistency_checking? This thread is about LP_DEAD marking going wrong in gist, but technically it's unrelated to the wal_consistency_checking thing. > So, which one is it? Perhaps number 2), because such a test would be > expensive to run in the main regression test suite? It sounds to me > that we need a bit more than just your patch here. We do have test coverage that might have caught the F_TUPLES_DELETED issue that I complained about on the other thread, but it's not part of the main regression tests. It's in src/test/modules/index/specs/killtuples.spec. Could that be why? -- Peter Geoghegan
