Re: pgsql: Harden new test case against force_parallel_mode = regress.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Harden new test case against force_parallel_mode = regress. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2504511.1677865602@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Harden new test case against force_parallel_mode = regress. (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Harden new test case against force_parallel_mode = regress.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:37 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> +ERROR: role "regress_psql_user" does not exist >> +CONTEXT: while setting parameter "session_authorization" to "regress_psql_user" > Oh, that's interesting (and sad). A parallel worker has a "startup > transaction" that is used to restore library and GUC state, and then > after that transaction commits, it starts up a new transaction that > uses the same snapshot and settings as the transaction in the parallel > leader. So the problem here is that the startup transaction can't see > the uncommitted work of some unrelated (as far as it knows) > transaction, and that prevents restoring the session_authorization > GUC. Got it. > That startup transaction has broken stuff before, and it would be nice > to get rid of it. Unfortunately, I don't remember right now why we > need it in the first place. I'm fairly sure that if you load the > library and GUC state without any transaction, that doesn't work, > because a bunch of important processing gets skipped. And I think if > you try to do those things in the "real" transaction that fails for > some reason too, maybe that there's no guarantee that all the relevant > GUCs can be changed at that point, but I'm fuzzy on the details at the > moment. Couldn't we install the leader's snapshot into both transactions? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: