| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Confusing with commit time usage in logical decoding |
| Date: | 2016-03-01 17:09:28 |
| Message-ID: | 56D5CCC8.9080703@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/03/16 17:57, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Artur Zakirov wrote:
>> Hello, Andres
>>
>> You have introduced a large replication progress tracking infrastructure
>> last year. And there is a problem described at the link in the quote below.
>>
>> Attached patch fix this issue. Is this patch correct? I will be grateful if
>> it is and if it will be committed.
>
> AFAICS this is clearly a bug introduced in 5aa235042:
>
> /* replay actions of all transaction + subtransactions in order */
> ReorderBufferCommit(ctx->reorder, xid, buf->origptr, buf->endptr,
> - parsed->xact_time);
> + commit_time, origin_id, origin_lsn);
> }
>
Well yeah but the commit_time is set few lines above as Artur pointed
out, I think the proposed fix is correct one.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anastasia Lubennikova | 2016-03-01 17:10:20 | Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes. |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2016-03-01 17:07:24 | Re: The plan for FDW-based sharding |