Re: Assertion failure on hot standby
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Assertion failure on hot standby |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTinSGpu=m-inxS6+R7yAfGCjLiWn_-Rgn7i-jVZt@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Assertion failure on hot standby (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Assertion failure on hot standby
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: >> That would mean running GetCurrentTransactionId() inside LockAcquire() > >> if (lockmode >= AccessExclusiveLock && >> locktag->locktag_type == LOCKTAG_RELATION && >> !RecoveryInProgress()) >> (void) GetCurrentTransactionId(); > >> Any objections to that fix? > > Could we have a wal level test in there too please? It's pretty awful > in any case... +1. Incidentally, I haven't been able to wrap my head around why we need to propagate AccessExclusiveLocks to the standby in the first place. Can someone explain? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: