Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()

From: Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Date: 2021-09-29 11:23:22
Message-ID: CAEudQAqYRH93L2qsEBb7jxpuBMYzUK+A1kG=R2E_m3=9vBuq-g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Em qua., 29 de set. de 2021 às 08:12, Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)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(at)amazon(dot)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.

regards,
Ranier Vilela

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Drouvot, Bertrand 2021-09-29 11:36:14 Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2021-09-29 11:18:58 Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress