Re: [Logical Replication] TRAP: FailedAssertion("rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_DEFAULT || rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_FULL || rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX"

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Neha Sharma <neha(dot)sharma(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Logical Replication] TRAP: FailedAssertion("rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_DEFAULT || rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_FULL || rel->rd_rel->relreplident == REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX"
Date: 2020-01-10 05:31:13
Message-ID: CAFiTN-tjvPjvVmD_Qwj=U7ZkECpmpQQCB0kmQt-nV3TMSA=5Yw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:31 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 07:30:34AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 10:43 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >> There's not much point in having this assert, right? Given that it
> >> covers all choices? Seems better to just drop it.
> >
> > Yeah right!
>
> Refreshing my mind on that... The two remaining assertions still make
> sense for update and delete changes per the restrictions in place in
> CheckCmdReplicaIdentity(),

Right

and there is a gap with the regression
> tests. So combining all that I get the attached patch (origin point
> is 665d1fa). Thoughts?

LGTM

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-01-10 06:03:44 Re: CREATE ROUTINE MAPPING
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-01-10 05:23:32 Re: remove some STATUS_* symbols