Re: ddd

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: ddd
Дата
Msg-id 20171221175524.2qshdx47jsynxgz7@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: ddd  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: ddd  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2017-12-21 10:35:06 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Great subject line!

Had started written the email before finishing testing, forgot to fill
in the blank. mutt annoyingly aborts with an empty subject, hence
smashing one key a couple times.


> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I run the regression tests with force_parallel_mode=on prior to the
> > parallel hash join patch, they pass.  If I run them now, they fail
> > inside the parallel hash join tests here:
> >
> > create table wide as select generate_series(1, 2) as id, rpad('',
> > 320000, 'x') as t;
> >
> > I'm guessing that test case would have failed before, too, but we
> > didn't have it.  I'll analyze this further in a bit.
> 
> I think this is just a poorly-written assertion.  currentCommandIdUsed
> is only used to skip redundant increments of the command counter, and
> CommandCounterIncrement() is categorically denied under parallelism
> anyway.  Therefore, it's OK for this to happen in parallel mode; we
> just need to be in the leader, not the worker.
> 
> Therefore, I proposed the attached patch, which fixes the regression
> test crash for me.


> diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xact.c b/src/backend/access/transam/xact.c
> index d430e662e6..b37510c24f 100644
> --- a/src/backend/access/transam/xact.c
> +++ b/src/backend/access/transam/xact.c
> @@ -683,12 +683,12 @@ GetCurrentCommandId(bool used)
>      if (used)
>      {
>          /*
> -         * Forbid setting currentCommandIdUsed in parallel mode, because we
> -         * have no provision for communicating this back to the master.  We
> +         * Forbid setting currentCommandIdUsed in a parallel worker, because
> +         * we have no provision for communicating this back to the master.  We
>           * could relax this restriction when currentCommandIdUsed was already
>           * true at the start of the parallel operation.
>           */
> -        Assert(CurrentTransactionState->parallelModeLevel == 0);
> +        Assert(!IsParallelWorker());
>          currentCommandIdUsed = true;
>      }
>      return currentCommandId;

Yea, that looks reasonable to me.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Fetter
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: AS OF queries
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Letting plpgsql in on the fun with the new expression eval stuff