Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Drouvot, Bertrand
Тема Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Дата
Msg-id d0805e5a-f225-b955-fe6d-85505a6004ea@amazon.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 9/27/21 9:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot@amazon.com> writes:
>> I recently observed a failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists().
> Hmm, interesting.
Thanks for looking at it!
>   If I take out the "update bdt2" step, so that the
> exception clause is just COMMIT, then I get something different:
>
> ERROR:  portal snapshots (1) did not account for all active snapshots (0)
> CONTEXT:  PL/pgSQL function inline_code_block line 8 at COMMIT

FWIW, I just gave it a try and it looks like this is also "fixed" by the 
proposed patch.

Does it make sense (as it is currently) to set the ActiveSnapshot to 
NULL and not ensuring the same is done for ActivePortal->portalSnapshot?

Or does it mean we should not reach a state where we set ActiveSnapshot 
to NULL while ActivePortal->portalSnapshot is not already NULL?

Thanks

Bertrand




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Следующее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] psql: \dn+ to show size of each schema (and \dA+ for AMs)