Re: [BUG] "FailedAssertion" reported when streaming in logical replication

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] "FailedAssertion" reported when streaming in logical replication
Date: 2021-04-27 06:51:53
Message-ID: CAFiTN-v7KagBn3MOo5uoFxk=tVFh=A63xUM8L4-H_gEkt-GRkQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 12:05 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > Can't we use 'txns_by_base_snapshot_lsn' list for this purpose? It is
> > > ensured in ReorderBufferSetBaseSnapshot that we always assign
> > > base_snapshot to a top-level transaction if the current is a known
> > > subxact. I think that will be true because we always form xid-subxid
> > > relation before processing each record in
> > > LogicalDecodingProcessRecord.
> >
> > Yeah, we can do that, but here we are only interested in top
> > transactions and this list will give us sub-transaction as well so we
> > will have to skip it in the below if condition.
> >
>
> I am not so sure about this point. I have explained above why I think
> there won't be any subtransactions in this. Can you please let me know
> what am I missing if anything?

Got your point, yeah this will only have top transactions so we can
use this. I will change this in the next patch. In fact we can put
an assert that it should not be an sub transaction?

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amul Sul 2021-04-27 06:52:20 Re: Skip temporary table schema name from explain-verbose output.
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-04-27 06:35:32 Re: [BUG] "FailedAssertion" reported when streaming in logical replication