Re: A assert failure when initdb with track_commit_timestamp=on
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>,
"Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-07-05T02:24:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Disable commit timestamps during bootstrap
- 8bca4476f9f9 13.22 landed
- b61ddcaf41cf 14.19 landed
- dcbbd43317c0 15.14 landed
- 7e7059abfd22 16.10 landed
- ae20c105f0b2 17.6 landed
- 29a4b63c6bc8 18.0 landed
- 5a6c39b6df33 19 (unreleased) landed
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes: > This is assuming that the default value assigned to a GUC will always > take the right decision in the bootstrap case, which is perhaps OK > anyway in most cases, or we would know about that during initdb. Yeah, I've been wondering about whether the code ought to accept source == PGC_S_DYNAMIC_DEFAULT. It doesn't matter until/unless we need to set this flag on a GUC that has code to compute a dynamic default, so any decision we made right now would be made in a vacuum ... but perhaps the right guess is to allow it. >> If we went this way, we'd presumably revert 5a6c39b6d in favor >> of marking track_commit_timestamp with this flag. > Makes sense, on HEAD. Well, you back-patched 5a6c39b6d, so it's not clear to me why we wouldn't want to back-patch something to fix any other GUC suffering from a comparable problem. I don't see that adding another possible GUC flag is an ABI break, especially when it's a flag that no extension could have a need to set. regards, tom lane