Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9176.1546613679@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it. (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it.
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes: > 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. Hm, I had forgotten that we had such an error message. Really that restriction needs to apply to any object in the temp namespace, not only tables. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: