Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
Date: 2021-04-30 14:13:03
Message-ID: CAFiTN-u1995n8zk5i72FLQ1jbkG=J_mqZzom71eALoJMXCKe1Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 3:01 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:03 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:00 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > The idea I have is to additionally check that we are decoding
> > > streaming or prepared transaction (the same check as we have for
> > > setting curtxn) or we can check if CheckXidAlive is a valid
> > > transaction id. What do you think?
> >
> > I think a check based on CheckXidAlive looks good to me. This will
> > protect against if a similar error is raised from any other path as
> > you mentioned above.
> >
>
> We can't use CheckXidAlive because it is reset by that time.

Right.

So, I
> used the other approach which led to the attached.

The patch looks fine to me.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2021-04-30 14:29:44 Re: pg_hba.conf.sample wording improvement
Previous Message Amit Langote 2021-04-30 13:57:02 Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY