Re: Duplicated LSN in ReorderBuffer
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Ildar Musin <ildar@adjust.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-08-12T21:35:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Aug-07, Andres Freund wrote: > I think we would need to do this for all values of > SnapBuildCurrentState() - after all the problem occurs because we > *previously* didn't assign subxids to the toplevel xid. Compared to the > cost of catalog changes, ReorderBufferAssignChild() is really cheap. So > I don't think there's any problem just calling it unconditionally (when > top_xid <> xid, of course). BTW I wrote the code as suggested and it passes all the tests ... but I then noticed that the unpatched code doesn't fail Ildar's original pgbench-based test for me, either. So maybe my laptop is not powerful enough to reproduce it, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I'm tempted to just push it, since it seems "obviously" more correct than the original. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
logical decoding: process ASSIGNMENT during snapshot build
- e8c7f40a1f8a 9.4.25 landed
- bac2fae05c77 13.0 landed
- ae4305f6d303 9.6.16 landed
- 96b5033e1171 12.0 landed
- 7110f5c37721 9.5.20 landed
- 4f7dbf0ef50b 10.11 landed
- 41f3d262693b 11.6 landed
-
Ability to advance replication slots
- 9c7d06d60680 11.0 cited