Re: [sqlsmith] Crash in GetOldestSnapshot()

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich(at)gmx(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [sqlsmith] Crash in GetOldestSnapshot()
Date: 2016-08-07 18:05:05
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYkk2wVs5VWLWgM-4gCmCQsGb6q4pZ_8tKqfETe__AjXw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> So I think in the short term what we should do about this is just fix
>> it so it doesn't crash.
>
> Well, we clearly need to fix GetOldestSnapshot so it won't crash,
> but I do not think that having RETURNING queries randomly returning
> "ERROR: no known snapshots" is acceptable even for a beta release.
> If we aren't prepared to do something about that before Monday,
> I think we need to revert 3e2f3c2e until we do have a fix for it.
>
> What I suggested just now in <2850(dot)1470592623(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> might
> be implementable with a couple hours' work, though. Do you have a
> reason to think it'd be insufficient?

No - if you can implement that quickly, I think it sounds like a great idea.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-08-07 18:11:44 Re: Slowness of extended protocol
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-08-07 18:04:10 Re: [sqlsmith] Crash in GetOldestSnapshot()