On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:31 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:14 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 9:38 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:48 AM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for pointing to the changes in the commit message. I corrected
> > > them. Attaching v4 patch set, consider it for further review.
> > >
> >
> > About 0001, have we tried to reproduce the actual bug here which means
> > when the error_callback is called we should face some problem? I feel
> > with the correct testcase we should hit the Assert
> > (Assert(IsTransactionState());) in SearchCatCacheInternal because
> > there we expect the transaction to be in a valid state. I understand
> > that the transaction is in a broken state at that time but having a
> > testcase to hit the actual bug makes it easy to test the fix.
>
> I have not tried hitting the Assert(IsTransactionState() in
> SearchCatCacheInternal. To do that, I need to figure out hitting
> "incorrect binary data format in logical replication column" error in
> either slot_modify_data or slot_store_data so that we will enter the
> error callback slot_store_error_callback and then IsTransactionState()
> should return false i.e. txn shouldn't be in TRANS_INPROGRESS.
>
Even, if you hit that via debugger it will be sufficient or you can
write another elog/ereport there to achieve the same. The exact test
case to hit that error is not mandatory.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.