Re: Assertion failure in SnapBuildInitialSnapshot()
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-01-30T11:29:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:31 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for making the patch! I'm still considering whether this approach is
> correct, but I can put a comment to your patch anyway.
>
> ```
> - Assert(!already_locked || LWLockHeldByMe(ProcArrayLock));
> -
> - if (!already_locked)
> - LWLockAcquire(ProcArrayLock, LW_EXCLUSIVE);
> + Assert(LWLockHeldByMe(ProcArrayLock));
> ```
>
> In this function, we regard that the ProcArrayLock has been already acquired as
> exclusive mode and modify data. I think LWLockHeldByMeInMode() should be used
> instead of LWLockHeldByMe().
>
Right, this is even evident from the comments atop
ReplicationSlotsComputeRequiredXmin("If already_locked is true,
ProcArrayLock has already been acquired exclusively.". But, I am not
sure if it is a good idea to remove 'already_locked' parameter,
especially in back branches as this is an exposed API.
--
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