Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> aren't we supposed to wrap beta2 any minute now?
>
> There are two open items listed on the open items page as blockers
> for beta2:
>
> - error in information_schema.element_types view definition (bug
> 5926)
> - more SSI loose ends
>
> We really ought to fix #1, because we've already bumped catversion
> since beta1 (several times, actually) and we'd probably like very
> much not to do it again before final.
>
> With respect to #2, it would be nice to fix that, but I'm
> disinclined to hold up beta2 for it. Kevin and Dan don't seem to
> have reached agreement on all the details of the patch, and even
> if they had, it's far from obvious that this will be the last SSI
> related change we'll need to make. I'd vote for pushing out beta2
> even if we can't get that one in.
There is this pending patch, without which there are infrequent
conditions under which the users could get a LOG level message and
accumulate files in pg_serial:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4DEE7BE4020000250003E2BD@gw.wicourts.gov
The other pending patch relates to the false positives serialization
failures and funny-looking pg_lock entries from not ignoring
non-MVCC snapshots in SSI. I don't think Dan had any problem with
the patch I offered, but I wasn't sure what to do about two
functions. He researched that and proposed a way to handle those.
That looked good to me on a first pass except that there was one
line he left at NULL instead of plugging in the snapshot. That looks
like an easily-fixed oversight. It will take me about an hour to
review his changes in detail and re-test everything, although I
don't expect any other issues. It seems odd not to include a change
that was requested by Tom, Robert, and Heikki (and which Dan and I
both put in the hours to have a patch before beta2) in beta2. It
does fix the issue which people were concerned about (the predicate
locks acquired on the table heap by the transaction when doing a
REINDEX within a serializable transaction is no longer occuring.)
The only other pending SSI issues I know of are minor documentation
tweaks.
-Kevin