diff options
author | Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> | 2025-09-05 08:18:18 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> | 2025-09-05 08:18:18 +0100 |
commit | 6ede13d1b5f515df0a199a7a830e448dab1511c0 (patch) | |
tree | 9bb5fc275c742607713acb7f3effca60dcb9e042 /src/backend/executor/nodeAppend.c | |
parent | 567d27e8e2b752743626eb259ba75ecdc936eaf3 (diff) |
Fix concurrent update issue with MERGE.
When executing a MERGE UPDATE action, if there is more than one
concurrent update of the target row, the lock-and-retry code would
sometimes incorrectly identify the latest version of the target tuple,
leading to incorrect results.
This was caused by using the ctid field from the TM_FailureData
returned by table_tuple_lock() in a case where the result was TM_Ok,
which is unsafe because the TM_FailureData struct is not guaranteed to
be fully populated in that case. Instead, it should use the tupleid
passed to (and updated by) table_tuple_lock().
To reduce the chances of similar errors in the future, improve the
commentary for table_tuple_lock() and TM_FailureData to make it
clearer that table_tuple_lock() updates the tid passed to it, and most
fields of TM_FailureData should not be relied on in non-failure cases.
An exception to this is the "traversed" field, which is set in both
success and failure cases.
Reported-by: Dmitry <dsy.075@yandex.ru>
Author: Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1570d30e-2b95-4239-b9c3-f7bf2f2f8556@yandex.ru
Backpatch-through: 15
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/executor/nodeAppend.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions