Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Assertion failure on hot standby

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Assertion failure on hot standby
Date: 2010-11-29 01:14:23
Message-ID: 1290993263.4634.3142.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 01:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > That would mean running GetCurrentTransactionId() inside LockAcquire()
> 
> > if (lockmode >= AccessExclusiveLock &&
> >     locktag->locktag_type == LOCKTAG_RELATION &&
> >     !RecoveryInProgress())
> > 	(void) GetCurrentTransactionId();
> 
> > Any objections to that fix?
> 
> Could we have a wal level test in there too please?  It's pretty awful
> in any case...

Slightly neater version of same idea applied to resolve this.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
 


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-11-29 01:34:09
Subject: Re: profiling connection overhead
Previous:From: Itagaki TakahiroDate: 2010-11-29 01:06:42
Subject: Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group