> On 07 Sep 2016, at 03:09, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> 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. > > Could you use as a base the version I just sent yesterday then? I > noticed many mistakes in the comments, for example many s/it's/its/ > and did a couple of adjustments around the code, the goto next_file > was particularly ugly. That will be that much work not do to again > later.
Yes. Already merged branch with your version. -- Stas Kelvich Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers