> On 06 Sep 2016, at 12:09, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 6 September 2016 at 09:58, Stas Kelvich <s.kelv...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> >> I'll check it against my failure scenario with subtransactions and post >> results or updated patch here. > > Make sure tests are added for that. It would have been better to say > you knew there were bugs in it earlier.
I’ve spotted that yesterday during rebase. Sorry. Next time in same situation i’ll write right away to save everyone’s time. > On 06 Sep 2016, at 12:03, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Stas Kelvich <s.kelv...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> Oh, I was preparing new version of patch, after fresh look on it. Probably, >> I should >> said that in this topic. I’ve found a bug in sub transaction handling and >> now working >> on fix. > > What's the problem actually? Handling of xids_p array in PrescanPreparedTransactions() is wrong for prepared tx's in memory. Also I want to double-check and add comments to RecoveryInProgress() checks in FinishGXact. I’ll post reworked patch in several days. -- Stas Kelvich Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
