Re: [PATCH][DOC] Fix for PREPARE TRANSACTION doc and postgres_fdw message.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Gilles Darold <gilles(at)darold(dot)net>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][DOC] Fix for PREPARE TRANSACTION doc and postgres_fdw message.
Date: 2019-11-09 01:22:51
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 10:19:01AM +0100, Gilles Darold wrote:
> I don't think so. The support or not of 2PC is on foreign data wrapper
> side. In postgres_fdw contrib the error for use with 2PC is not part of
> the test but it will be thrown anyway. I guess that a test will be
> valuable only if there is support for readonly query.

That's what I call a case for negative testing. We don't allow 2PC to
be used so there is a point in having a test to make sure of that.
This way, if the code in this area is refactored or changed, we still
make sure that 2PC is correctly prevented. My suggestion is to close
this gap. One point here is that this requires an alternate output
file because of max_prepared_transactions and there is no point in
creating one with all the tests of postgres_fdw in a single file as we
have now as it would create 8k lines of expected file bloat, so it
would be better to split the tests first. My 2c.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-11-09 01:39:37 Re: 'Invalid lp' during heap_xlog_delete
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-11-09 01:21:46 First-draft back-branch release notes are up for review