From b2770576486265c2ce35b64e875028672a3bb7b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alvaro Herrera Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:43:39 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Fix broken Assert() introduced by 8e9a16ab8f7f0e58 Don't assert MultiXactIdIsRunning if the multi came from a tuple that had been share-locked and later copied over to the new cluster by pg_upgrade. Doing that causes an error to be raised unnecessarily: MultiXactIdIsRunning is not open to the possibility that its argument came from a pg_upgraded tuple, and all its other callers are already checking; but such multis cannot, obviously, have transactions still running, so the assert is pointless. Noticed while investigating the bogus pg_multixact/offsets/0000 file left over by pg_upgrade, as reported by Andres Freund in http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140530121631.GE25431@alap3.anarazel.de Backpatch to 9.3, as the commit that introduced the buglet. --- src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c index f8bed19692..6861ae0a7f 100644 --- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c +++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c @@ -5518,8 +5518,14 @@ FreezeMultiXactId(MultiXactId multi, uint16 t_infomask, * was a locker only, it can be removed without any further * consideration; but if it contained an update, we might need to * preserve it. + * + * Don't assert MultiXactIdIsRunning if the multi came from a + * pg_upgrade'd share-locked tuple, though, as doing that causes an + * error to be raised unnecessarily. */ - Assert(!MultiXactIdIsRunning(multi)); + Assert((!(t_infomask & HEAP_LOCK_MASK) && + HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY(t_infomask)) || + !MultiXactIdIsRunning(multi)); if (HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY(t_infomask)) { *flags |= FRM_INVALIDATE_XMAX;