Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it.
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190104131351.GF2067@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it.
Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it. |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 05:18:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Hm. I can reproduce this if I start in a virgin database, but not > otherwise. I think the problem is that the prepared transaction has > created the pg_temp_NN schema for its session, and therefore there > is an uncommitted pg_namespace entry for that schema name, and the > second session is also trying to create that schema (because it has > the same backend ID) so it blocks waiting to see if that index > entry commits. That should not be allowed to commit directly. I think that we should just add a new value for MyXactFlags which tracks the transaction where the temporary namespace has been created, and generate an error if trying to use 2PC in this case. A separate flag looks necessary to me so as we don't bump on "cannot PREPARE a transaction that has operated on temporary tables" in this case. That would be back-patchable, and if both XACT_FLAGS_ACCESSEDTEMPREL and the new flag are set then we just blow up on the original error message when committing. Opinions? -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: