From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Improve description of XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS |
Date: | 2022-07-21 13:12:53 |
Message-ID: | CAExHW5vXe3-vhv04fQAtYxrvo+j-5UB1a2NuP6cJR+-rgV8Cig@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 6:44 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I realized that standby_desc_running_xacts() in standbydesc.c doesn't
> describe subtransaction XIDs. I've attached the patch to improve the
> description. Here is an example by pg_wlaldump:
>
> * HEAD
> rmgr: Standby len (rec/tot): 58/ 58, tx: 0, lsn:
> 0/01D0C608, prev 0/01D0C5D8, desc: RUNNING_XACTS nextXid 1050
> latestCompletedXid 1047 oldestRunningXid 1048; 1 xacts: 1048
>
> * w/ patch
> rmgr: Standby len (rec/tot): 58/ 58, tx: 0, lsn:
> 0/01D0C608, prev 0/01D0C5D8, desc: RUNNING_XACTS nextXid 1050
> latestCompletedXid 1047 oldestRunningXid 1048; 1 xacts: 1048; 1
> subxacts: 1049
>
I think this is a good addition to debugging info. +1
If we are going to add 64 subxid numbers then it would help if we
could be more verbose and print "subxid overflowed" instead of "subxid
ovf".
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yura Sokolov | 2022-07-21 13:23:11 | Re: SLRUs in the main buffer pool, redux |
Previous Message | Yura Sokolov | 2022-07-21 13:00:20 | Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration |