Horton

Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-11-23T02:59:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:33 PM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Regarding the tests, the patch includes a new scenario to
>> reproduce this issue. However, since the issue can be reproduced also
>> by the existing scenario (with low probability, though), I'm not sure
>> it's worth adding the new scenario.
>
> AFAICS, the test added doesn't 100% reproduce this issue, so, maybe, it does not worth it. But, I do not have a strong opinion here.
> Let's add tests in a separate commit and let the actual committer to decide what to do, should we?
>

+1 to not have a test for this as the scenario can already be tested
by the existing set of tests.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Commits

  1. Fix uninitialized access to InitialRunningXacts during decoding.

  2. Fix catalog lookup with the wrong snapshot during logical decoding.