Re: Small Bug in GetConflictingVirtualXIDs

On Sunday 27 December 2009 21:04:43 Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-12-27 at 20:11 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 December 2009 11:42:30 Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 03:19 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > On Monday 21 December 2009 16:48:52 Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > > Giving the drop database a snapshot is not the answer. I expect
> > > > > Andres to be able to fix this with a simple patch that would not
> > > > > effect the case of normal running.
> > > >
> > > > Actually its less simply than I had thought at first - I don't think
> > > > the code ever handled that correctly.
> > > > I might be wrong there, my knowledge of the involved code is a bit
> > > > sparse... The whole conflict resolution builds on the concept of
> > > > waiting for an VXid, but an idle backend does not have a valid vxid.
> > > > Thats correct, right?
> > >
> > > I don't see any mileage in making Startup process wait for an idle
> > > session, so no real reason to wait for others either.
> >
> > So here is a small patch implementing that behaviour.
>
> OK, thanks. I have also written something, as mentioned. Will review.
Thats why I had asked in another mail ;-) But I have learned a bit more about
pg while writing that patch so its fine for me at least ;-)

Andres