On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 9:08 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Please find attached the latest patch set v86*
>
A couple of comments:
(1) I think one of my suggested changes was missed (or was that intentional?):
BEFORE:
+ The LSN of the commit prepared.
AFTER:
+ The LSN of the commit prepared transaction.
(2) In light of Tom Lane's recent changes in:
fe6a20ce54cbbb6fcfe9f6675d563af836ae799a (Don't use Asserts to check
for violations of replication protocol)
there appear to be some instances of such code in these patches.
For example, in the v86-0001 patch:
+/*
+ * Handle PREPARE message.
+ */
+static void
+apply_handle_prepare(StringInfo s)
+{
+ LogicalRepPreparedTxnData prepare_data;
+ char gid[GIDSIZE];
+
+ logicalrep_read_prepare(s, &prepare_data);
+
+ Assert(prepare_data.prepare_lsn == remote_final_lsn);
The above Assert() should be changed to something like:
+ if (prepare_data.prepare_lsn != remote_final_lsn)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION),
+ errmsg_internal("incorrect prepare LSN %X/%X in
prepare message (expected %X/%X)",
+ LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(prepare_data.prepare_lsn),
+ LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(remote_final_lsn))));
Without being more familiar with this code, it's difficult for me to
judge exactly how many of such cases are in these patches.
Regards,
Greg Nancarrow
Fujitsu Australia
