Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 352ee4b9-ae44-0640-71c3-edca97b89036@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/7/22 17:39, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > > On 3/1/22 12:53, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:16 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 6:04 AM Tomas Vondra >>> <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2/10/22 19:17, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>>>> I've polished & pushed the first part adding sequence decoding >>>>> infrastructure etc. Attached are the two remaining parts. >>>>> >>>>> I plan to wait a day or two and then push the test_decoding part. The >>>>> last part (for built-in replication) will need more work and maybe >>>>> rethinking the grammar etc. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've pushed the second part, adding sequences to test_decoding. >>>> >>> >>> The test_decoding is failing randomly in the last few days. I am not >>> completely sure but they might be related to this work. The two of >>> these appears to be due to the same reason: >>> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=skink&dt=2022-02-25%2018%3A50%3A09 >>> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=locust&dt=2022-02-17%2015%3A17%3A07 >>> >>> TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: >>> "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 1173, PID: 35013) >>> 0 postgres 0x00593de0 ExceptionalCondition + 160\\0 >>> >> >> While reviewing the code for this, I noticed that in >> sequence_decode(), we don't call ReorderBufferProcessXid to register >> the first known lsn in WAL for the current xid. The similar functions >> logicalmsg_decode() or heap_decode() do call ReorderBufferProcessXid >> even if they decide not to queue or send the change. Is there a reason >> for not doing the same here? However, I am not able to deduce any >> scenario where lack of this will lead to such an Assertion failure. >> Any thoughts? >> > > Thanks, that seems like an omission. Will fix. > I've pushed this simple fix. Not sure it'll fix the assert failures on skink/locust, though. Given the lack of information it'll be difficult to verify. So let's wait a bit. regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: