Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
| От | Drouvot, Bertrand |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | be17b55d-6282-e2e1-ecca-b2b717979ffb@amazon.com обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() (Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 9/29/21 12:59 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:
Em qua., 29 de set. de 2021 às 06:55, Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot@amazon.com> escreveu:I'm also inclined to #1.
I have a stupid question, why duplicate PushActiveSnapshot?Wouldn't one function be better?PushActiveSnapshot(Snapshot snap, int as_level);Sample calls:PushActiveSnapshot(GetTransactionSnapshot(), GetCurrentTransactionNestLevel());PushActiveSnapshot(queryDesc->snapshot, GetCurrentTransactionNestLevel());PushActiveSnapshot(GetTransactionSnapshot(), portal->createSubid);
I would say because that could "break" existing extensions for example.
Adding a new function prevents "updating" existing extensions making use of PushActiveSnapshot().
Thanks
Bertrand
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: