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
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 |