| From: | Kartyshov Ivan <i(dot)kartyshov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed |
| Date: | 2023-12-08 09:20:28 |
| Message-ID: | 2c7ed9b13cf776c918234153d95a1b3c@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-11-27 03:08, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> I've retried my case with v6 and it doesn't fail anymore. But I
> wonder how safe it is to reset xmin within the user-visible function?
> We have no guarantee that the function is not called inside the
> complex query. Then how will the rest of the query work with xmin
> reset? Separate utility statement still looks like more safe option
> for me.
As you mentioned, we can`t guarantee that the function is not called
inside the complex query, but we can return the xmin after waiting.
But you are right and separate utility statement still looks more safe.
So I want to bring up the discussion on separate utility statement
again.
--
Ivan Kartyshov
Postgres Professional: www.postgrespro.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Li, Yong | 2023-12-08 09:35:17 | Re: Proposal to add page headers to SLRU pages |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-12-08 09:06:19 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |