Kevin Grittner <kgri...@ymail.com> wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 2013-10-07 06:44:19 -0700, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> >>> Patch attached. Any objections to applying that Real Soon Now? >>> (When, exactly is the deadline to make today's minor release >>> cut-off?) >> >> Maybe it's overly careful, but I personally slightly vote for >> applying it after the backbranch releases. The current behaviour >> doesn't have any harsh consequences and mostly reproduceable in >> artifical scenarios and the logic here is complex enough that we >> might miss something. >> >> A day just doesn't leave much time to noticing any issues. > > I grant that the bug in existing production code is not likely to > get hit very often, but it is a bug; the new isolation test shows > the bug clearly and shows that the suggested patch fixes it. > What tips the scales for me is that the only possible downside if > we missed something is an occasional false positive serialization > failure, which does not break correctness -- we try to minimize > those for performance reasons, but the algorithm allows them and > they currently do happen.
I am, of course, continuing to review this. There might be a problem if someone applies this fix while any prepared transactions are pending. Still investigating the impact and possible fixes. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
