Re: snapbuild woes

From: Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: snapbuild woes
Date: 2017-05-05 11:10:10
Message-ID: eb253506-8e8a-a4a4-41ff-a530e65d358b@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/05/17 02:00, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2017-05-02 08:55:53 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> Aah, now I understand we talked about slightly different things, I
>> considered the running thing to be first step towards tracking aborted
>> txes everywhere.
>> I think
>> we'll have to revisit tracking of aborted transactions in PG11 then
>> though because of the 'snapshot too large' issue when exporting, at
>> least I don't see any other way to fix that.
>
> FWIW, that seems unnecessary - we can just check for that using the
> clog. Should be very simple to check for aborted xacts when exporting
> the snapshot (like 2 lines + comments). That should address your
> concern, right?

Right, because there isn't practical difference between running and
aborted transaction for us so we don't mind if the abort has happened in
the future. Yeah the export code could do the check seems quite simple.

--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2017-05-05 11:13:42 Re: Logical replication - TRAP: FailedAssertion in pgstat.c
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2017-05-05 10:58:32 Re: Why type coercion is not performed for parameters?