Re: Assertion failure in SnapBuildInitialSnapshot()
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-11-16T08:52:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 7:30 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2022-11-15 16:20:00 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 8:08 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > nor do we enforce in an obvious place that we > > > don't already hold a snapshot. > > > > > > > We have a check for (FirstXactSnapshot == NULL) in > > RestoreTransactionSnapshot->SetTransactionSnapshot. Won't that be > > sufficient? > > I don't think that'd e.g. catch a catalog snapshot being held, yet that'd > still be bad. And I think checking in SetTransactionSnapshot() is too late, > we've already overwritten MyProc->xmin by that point. > So, shall we add the below Asserts in SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() after we have the Assert for Assert(!FirstSnapshotSet)? Assert(FirstXactSnapshot == NULL); Assert(!HistoricSnapshotActive()); -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix a race condition in updating procArray->replication_slot_xmin.
- 2a5225b99d76 19 (unreleased) landed
- fd7c86cfaf13 18.2 landed
- 123b851abdac 17.8 landed
- 82146672261d 16.12 landed
- fa557d3005e7 15.16 landed
- 57048d6e1733 14.21 landed
-
Don't retreat slot's confirmed_flush LSN.
- ad5eaf390c58 18.0 cited
-
Add additional checks while creating the initial decoding snapshot.
- 240e0dbacd39 16.0 landed