Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in atransaction
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in atransaction |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f912575d-b407-f1c6-336c-36ceee4d2109@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in atransaction (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in atransaction
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 2018/12/18 14:04, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:24:54PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> I noticed that too. As you say, it is not possible to exercise a test we >> might add for this with `make check`, because it runs with a fixed value >> of wal_level (= replica). But it is possible with `make installcheck` on >> a cluster that's running with wal_level = minimal. Maybe, something like >> this: >> >> [...] >> >> From the above output, your patch will make "ERROR: could not open file >> xxx" go away. > > Last time we discussed about adding a test case in this area, we came up > with a TAP test, so this could apply here as well: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f20181114.124736.206988673.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp > > What scares me a lot about complicating this code is that we are not > seeing the end of it with this so-said optimization in removing the > relfilenode like that... There are other fancy cases where the failure > can happen (please see patch 0001). The link you shared is broken, so I couldn't read that email to understand the relation of relfilenode removal optimization to the bug here or how a TAP test was deployed for it. To clarify, the bug in this case is that the optimization to skip writing WAL if a "heap" relation being copied into is created in same sub-transaction is mistakenly applied to foreign tables. Thanks, Amit
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: