Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 3:44 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Looks good as far as it goes, but I wonder whether any of the other >> get_slot_xmins calls need polling too. Don't feel a need to add such >> calls until someone exhibits a failure there, but I won't be very >> surprised if someone does.
And behold, we have here https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=nightjar&dt=2017-08-08%2020%3A54%3A09 # Failed test 'xmin of cascaded slot non-null with hs feedback' # at t/001_stream_rep.pl line 224. # got: '' # expected: anything else That's one of only four calls lacking a preceding wait_slot_xmins call. The ones at lines 173 and 177 seem safe because nothing has happened yet. I think the one at line 300 should be safe because the standby_2 server is shut down at that point, but is there any way that the standby_1's view hasn't updated by the time that happens? > I got the same thought, wondering as well if get_slot_xmins should be > renamed check_slot_xmins with the is() tests moved inside it as well. > Not sure if that's worth the API ugliness though. Mmm, doesn't seem like that's worth doing, but I'm half tempted to merge wait_slot_xmins into get_slot_xmins so you can't skip it ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers