Hi,
On 2020-08-16 13:31:53 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I now luckily have a rr trace of the problem, so I hope I can narrow it
> down to the original problem fairly quickly.
Gna, I think I see the problem. In at least one place I wrongly
accessed the 'dense' array of in-progress xids using the 'pgprocno',
instead of directly using the [0...procArray->numProcs) index.
Working on a fix, together with some improved asserts.
Greetings,
Andres Freund