Re: Unreproducible bug in snapshot import code

From: Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unreproducible bug in snapshot import code
Date: 2011-10-24 17:41:34
Message-ID: CABwTF4V8FHoxhOxYKkJ2Gt6-Cex20Uzeghr+8tKi_aUzN5in2Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>wrote:

>
> Excerpts from Gurjeet Singh's message of lun oct 24 13:55:44 -0300 2011:
>
> > Starting from line 89 of terminal1.txt we see this snippet:
> >
> > postgres=# rollback;
> > ROLLBACK
> > postgres=# begin TRANSACTION ;
> > BEGIN
> > postgres=# set transaction snapshot '000002C8-1';
> > ERROR: SET TRANSACTION SNAPSHOT must be called before any query
> > postgres=# rollback;
> > ROLLBACK
> >
> >
> > As you can see the SET TRANSACTION SNAPSHOT was the first statement
> in
> > that transaction, and yet the ERROR message says that it is not.
>
> Maybe the tab-completion feature issued a query before the set
> transaction command.
>

I have tried reproducing the bug starting from 1 and 2 transactions before
the one shown in snippet, and I used tab-completion to get the same
screen-output as termonal1.txt and yet it's not reproducible.

Regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-10-24 17:51:59 Re: So, is COUNT(*) fast now?
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2011-10-24 17:38:34 Re: So, is COUNT(*) fast now?