| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("HaveRegisteredOrActiveSnapshot()", File: "toast_internals.c", Line: 670, PID: 19403) |
| Date: | 2022-04-18 14:53:55 |
| Message-ID: | 2272216.1650293635@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I still think it would be better to have GetOldestSnapshot() be
> smarter and refuse to return the catalog snapshot. For one thing, that
> way we'd be testing for the problem case in non-assert builds also.
I was wondering about that too. On the other hand, given that
we know this area is squishy, transforming fails-in-assert-builds
to fails-everywhere is not necessarily desirable.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2022-04-18 15:05:49 | Re: pg_walcleaner - new tool to detect, archive and delete the unneeded wal files (was Re: pg_archivecleanup - add the ability to detect, archive and delete the unneeded wal files on the primary) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-04-18 14:51:08 | Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("HaveRegisteredOrActiveSnapshot()", File: "toast_internals.c", Line: 670, PID: 19403) |