Re: Improve description of XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS

On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:53 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Mon, 15 Aug 2022 11:16:56 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote in
> > Sorry for the late reply.
>
> No worries. Anyway I was in a long (as a Japanese:) vacation.
>
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 4:29 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > record is sound". Is it any trouble with assuming the both *can*
> > > happen at once?  If something's broken, it will be reflected in the
> > > output.
> >
> > Fair point. We may not need to interpret the contents.
>
> Yeah.
>
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 3:24 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Another point is if the xid/subxid lists get long, I see it annoying
> > > that the "overflowed" messages goes far away to the end of the long
> > > line. Couldn't we rearrange the item order of the line as the follows?
> > >
> > > nextXid %u latestCompletedXid %u oldestRunningXid %u;[ subxid overflowed;][ %d xacts: %u %u ...;][ subxacts: %u
%u..]
 
> > >
> >
> > I'm concerned that we have two information of subxact apart. Given
> > that showing both individual subxacts and "overflow" is a bug, I think
>
> Bug or every kind of breakage of the file. So if "overflow"ed, we
> don't need to show a subxid there but I thought that there's no need
> to change behavior in that case since it scarcely happens.
>
> > we can output like:
> >
> >     if (xlrec->subxcnt > 0)
> >     {
> >         appendStringInfo(buf, "; %d subxacts:", xlrec->subxcnt);
> >         for (i = 0; i < xlrec->subxcnt; i++)
> >             appendStringInfo(buf, " %u", xlrec->xids[xlrec->xcnt + i]);
> >     }
> >
> >     if (xlrec->subxid_overflow)
> >         appendStringInfoString(buf, "; subxid overflowed");
>
> Yea, it seems like what I proposed upthread. I'm fine with that since
> it is an abonormal situation.
>
> > Or we can output the "subxid overwlowed" first.
>
> (I prefer this, as that doesn't change the output in the normal case
> but the anormality will be easilly seen if happens.)
>

Updated the patch accordingly.

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada