Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take

From: Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take
Date: 2018-10-26 11:24:56
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:11 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>

> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 5:49 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>> I am able to generate the simple test and found the problem. The issue
>> with the following
>> SQL.
>> INTO TABLE xacttest
>> FROM aggtest;
>> During the processing of the above query, the tuple that is selected from
>> the aggtest is
>> sent to the intorel_receive() function, and the same tuple is used for
>> the insert, because
>> of this reason, the tuple xmin is updated and it leads to failure of
>> selecting the data from
>> another query. I fixed this issue by materializing the slot.
> Wrong patch attached in the earlier mail, sorry for the inconvenience.
> Attached proper fix patch.
> I will look into isolation test failures.

Here I attached the cumulative patch with all fixes that are shared in
earlier mails by me.
Except fast_default test, rest of test failures are fixed.

Haribabu Kommi
Fujitsu Australia

Attachment Content-Type Size
0002-init-fork-API.patch application/octet-stream 6.8 KB
0001-Further-fixes-and-cleanup.patch application/octet-stream 12.2 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Antonin Houska 2018-10-26 11:32:01 Comment fix and question about dshash.c
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2018-10-26 11:23:14 Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index?