| From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zhijie Hou <houzhijie22(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Assertion failure in update_local_synced_slot(), slotsync.c:364 |
| Date: | 2026-11-14 06:52:21 |
| Message-ID: | avgFJdSwQDx7DqaL@bdtpg |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 13, 2026 at 10:18:34PM -0800, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I think the root cause is that commit 788ec96d591 replaced
> found_consistent_snapshot with the check of slotsync_skip_reason, but
> they're not equivalent: found_consistent_snapshot is false unless the
> current cycle synced the slot and found a consistent snapshot, whereas
> slotsync_skip_reason is SS_SKIP_NONE unless the current cycle detected
> a reason to skip. So an alternative idea would be to bring back
> found_consistent_snapshot part from the commit. That way, the decision
> of persisting the slot doesn't depend on the skip_reasons at all.
Yeah, that makes sense to me.
> I've attached a PoC patch.
Thanks! Will look at it early next week.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Henson Choi | 2026-11-14 09:16:44 | Re: [DEPARSE] Operators on ROW() constructors read back as row comparisons |
| Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2026-11-14 06:41:02 | Re: Assertion failure in update_local_synced_slot(), slotsync.c:364 |