On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 13:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > v3 attached > > This patch changes KnownAssignedXidsRemove() so that failure to find > the target XID is elog(ERROR) (ie, a PANIC, since this is in the > startup process).
Not in all cases. The code is correct, as far as I am aware from testing. > However, this comment is still there: > /* > * We can fail to find an xid if the xid came from a subtransaction that > * aborts, though the xid hadn't yet been reported and no WAL records > have > * been written using the subxid. In that case the abort record will > * contain that subxid and we haven't seen it before. > */ > > WTF? Either the comment is wrong or this should not be an elog > condition. That section of code has been rewritten many times. I think it is now inaccurate and should be removed. I left it there because the unfortunate history of the project has been the removal of comments and then later rediscovery of the truth, sometimes more than once. I could no longer reproduce that error; someone else may know differently. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
