Re: SSI 2PC coverage

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>
Subject: Re: SSI 2PC coverage
Date: 2011-07-05 18:14:30
Message-ID: 4E135486.5080606@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05.07.2011 20:06, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> [resending after gzip of test patch]
>
> In reviewing the recent fix to 2PC coverage in SSI, I found some
> cases which didn't seem to be covered. Dan bit the bullet and came
> up with an additional isolation test to rigorously cover all the
> permutations, to find *all* 2PC statement orderings which weren't
> working right. Because it was so big, he pared out tests which were
> redundant, in that they exercised the same code paths and pointed at
> the same issues. A patch to add this test is attached. Run against
> HEAD it shows the errors. It's kinda big, but I think it's worth
> having.
>
> Attached is also a patch to fix those, so that all permutations
> work.

I think that needs some explanation, why only those SxactIsCommitted()
tests need to be replaced with SxactIsPrepared()? What about the first
SxactIsCommitted() test in OnConflict_CheckForSerializationFailure(),
for instance?

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-07-05 18:15:13 Re: SSI atomic commit
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2011-07-05 18:01:19 Re: SSI atomic commit