Re: Why don't update minimum recovery point in xact_redo_abort

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: 蔡梦娟(玊于) <mengjuan(dot)cmj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why don't update minimum recovery point in xact_redo_abort
Date: 2021-07-27 10:51:43
Message-ID: YP/lP2/8qALkIJdf@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:26:05PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> ISTM that you're right. xact_redo_abort() should call XLogFlush() to
> update the minimum recovery point on truncation. This seems
> the oversight in commit 7bffc9b7bf.

Indeed. It would be nice to see some refactoring of this code as
well? Both share a lot of steps, so adding something to one path can
easily lead to the other path being forgotten.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Westermann (DWE) 2021-07-27 10:54:26 Re: Small typo in variable.c
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-07-27 10:46:37 Re: Small typo in variable.c