From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Assertion failure in SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() |
Date: | 2022-11-16 08:52:01 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+Urvs6ZZhTZ5fD6b0qGM__uiz8e8gwBb9EJAQZkbgEBg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 7:30 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2022-11-15 16:20:00 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 8:08 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > > nor do we enforce in an obvious place that we
> > > don't already hold a snapshot.
> > >
> >
> > We have a check for (FirstXactSnapshot == NULL) in
> > RestoreTransactionSnapshot->SetTransactionSnapshot. Won't that be
> > sufficient?
>
> I don't think that'd e.g. catch a catalog snapshot being held, yet that'd
> still be bad. And I think checking in SetTransactionSnapshot() is too late,
> we've already overwritten MyProc->xmin by that point.
>
So, shall we add the below Asserts in SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() after
we have the Assert for Assert(!FirstSnapshotSet)?
Assert(FirstXactSnapshot == NULL);
Assert(!HistoricSnapshotActive());
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2022-11-16 08:57:14 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2022-11-16 08:37:20 | Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15) |