Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
| От | Ranier Vilela |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAEudQAqYRH93L2qsEBb7jxpuBMYzUK+A1kG=R2E_m3=9vBuq-g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() ("Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot@amazon.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em qua., 29 de set. de 2021 às 08:12, Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot@amazon.com> escreveu:
Hi,
On 9/29/21 12:59 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:Em qua., 29 de set. de 2021 às 06:55, Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot@amazon.com> escreveu:I'm also inclined to #1.I have a stupid question, why duplicate PushActiveSnapshot?Wouldn't one function be better?PushActiveSnapshot(Snapshot snap, int as_level);Sample calls:PushActiveSnapshot(GetTransactionSnapshot(), GetCurrentTransactionNestLevel());PushActiveSnapshot(queryDesc->snapshot, GetCurrentTransactionNestLevel());PushActiveSnapshot(GetTransactionSnapshot(), portal->createSubid);I would say because that could "break" existing extensions for example.
Adding a new function prevents "updating" existing extensions making use of PushActiveSnapshot().
Valid argument of course.
But the extensions should also fit the core code.
Duplicating functions is very bad for maintenance and bloats the code unnecessarily, IMHO.
But the extensions should also fit the core code.
Duplicating functions is very bad for maintenance and bloats the code unnecessarily, IMHO.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: