Re: Bug in two-phase transaction recovery

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Bug in two-phase transaction recovery
Date: 2016-09-08 09:35:27
Message-ID: CABOikdMV3U9GttU1es-RFfN_iPh_T1-9u9PXG8uqj+HSyc=nfQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
> wrote:
> > Some time ago two-phase state file format was changed to have variable
> size GID,
> > but several places that read that files were not updated to use new
> offsets. Problem
> > exists in master and 9.6 and can be reproduced on prepared transactions
> with
> > savepoints.
>
> Oops and meh. This meritates an open item, and has better be fixed by
> 9.6.0. I am glad you noticed that honestly. And we had better take
> care of this issue as soon as possible.
>
>
Indeed, it's a bug. Thanks Stas for tracking it down and Michael for the
review and checking other places. I also looked at the patch and it seems
fine to me. FWIW I looked at all other places where TwoPhaseFileHeader is
referred and they look safe to me.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emre Hasegeli 2016-09-08 09:55:12 Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2016-09-08 09:29:20 Re: Stopping logical replication protocol