On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 5:58 PM Maxim Orlov wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2022 at 09:40, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 4:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:48 PM Masahiko Sawada
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM Amit Kapila
On Fri, 25 Nov 2022 at 09:40, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 4:43 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:48 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Agreed not to have a test case for this.
> > >
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 4:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:48 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> >
> > Agreed not to have a test case for this.
> >
> > I've attached an updated patch. I've confirmed this patch works
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:48 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Agreed not to have a test case for this.
>
> I've attached an updated patch. I've confirmed this patch works for
> all supported branches.
>
I have slightly changed the checks used
>
> Agreed not to have a test case for this.
>
> I've attached an updated patch. I've confirmed this patch works for
> all supported branches.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Masahiko Sawada
> Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
>
It works for me as well. Thanks!
I've created a commitfest entry for
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:33 PM Maxim Orlov wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Regarding the tests, the patch includes a new scenario to
> >> reproduce this issue. However, since the issue can be reproduced also
> >> by the existing scenario (with low
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:33 PM Maxim Orlov wrote:
>>
>>
>> Regarding the tests, the patch includes a new scenario to
>> reproduce this issue. However, since the issue can be reproduced also
>> by the existing scenario (with low probability, though), I'm not sure
>> it's worth adding the new
> I've attached a draft patch. To fix it, I think we can reset
> InitialRunningXacts and NInitialRunningXacts at FreeSnapshotBuilder()
> and add an assertion in AllocateSnapshotBuilder() to make sure both
> are reset.
>
Thanks for the patch. It works fine. I've tested this patch for 15 and 11
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 6:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 6:17 PM Maxim Orlov wrote:
> >
> > PROBLEM
> >
> > After some investigation, I think, the problem is in the snapbuild.c
> > (commit 272248a0c1b1, see [0]). We do allocate InitialRunningXacts
> > array in the
>
> Thank you for the report and initial analysis. I have added Sawada-San
> to know his views as he was the primary author of this work.
>
> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.
>
OK, thanks a lot. I hope, we'll fix this soon.
--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 6:17 PM Maxim Orlov wrote:
>
> PROBLEM
>
> After some investigation, I think, the problem is in the snapbuild.c (commit
> 272248a0c1b1, see [0]). We do allocate InitialRunningXacts
> array in the context of builder->context, but for the time when we call
>
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 2:22 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2022-11-21 15:47:12 +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote:
> > After some investigation, I think, the problem is in the snapbuild.c
> > (commit 272248a0c1b1, see [0]). We do allocate InitialRunningXacts
> > array in the context of builder->context,
Hi,
On 2022-11-21 15:47:12 +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote:
> After some investigation, I think, the problem is in the snapbuild.c
> (commit 272248a0c1b1, see [0]). We do allocate InitialRunningXacts
> array in the context of builder->context, but for the time when we call
> SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn this
Hi!
PREAMBLE
For a last couple of months, I stumbled into a problem while running tests
on ARM (Debain, aarch64) and some more wired platforms
for my 64–bit XIDs patch set. Test contrib/test_decoding
(catalog_change_snapshot) rarely failed with the next message:
TRAP:
14 matches
Mail list logo
