Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-19 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:45:38AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > None here. Thanks. And committed. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-18 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On 2019-Feb-18, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 01:01:29PM +0100, Antonin Houska wrote: > > As for the bug fix, I think the additional assignment does not make things > > worse because SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() already does overwrite some fields: > > "xip" and "xnt". > > Ah,

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-17 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 01:01:29PM +0100, Antonin Houska wrote: > As for the bug fix, I think the additional assignment does not make things > worse because SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() already does overwrite some fields: > "xip" and "xnt". Ah, right. I somewhat missed that. Let's move on with

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-15 Thread Antonin Houska
Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 11:59:05AM +0100, Antonin Houska wrote: > > Sorry, I forgot. Patch is below and I'm going to add an entry to the > > next CF. > > > @@ -615,6 +615,8 @@ SnapBuildInitialSnapshot(SnapBuild *builder) > > > > TransactionIdAdvance(xid);

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-13 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 11:59:05AM +0100, Antonin Houska wrote: > Sorry, I forgot. Patch is below and I'm going to add an entry to the > next CF. > @@ -615,6 +615,8 @@ SnapBuildInitialSnapshot(SnapBuild *builder) > > TransactionIdAdvance(xid); > } > + /* And of course,

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2019-02-08 Thread Antonin Houska
Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:28:54AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: > > > > > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set > > > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test function, and > > > indeed it

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2018-06-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:28:54AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: > > > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set > > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test function, and indeed > > it > > converts the "xid" array to

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2018-05-30 Thread Antonin Houska
Andres Freund wrote: > On May 30, 2018 9:45:32 AM EDT, Antonin Houska wrote: > >Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > >> On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: > >> > >> > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set > >> > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2018-05-30 Thread Andres Freund
On May 30, 2018 9:45:32 AM EDT, Antonin Houska wrote: >Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: >> >> > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set >> > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test function, >and indeed it >> > converts

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2018-05-30 Thread Antonin Houska
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: > > > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set > > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test function, and indeed > > it > > converts the "xid" array to match its semantics (i.e. the xid items >

Re: Incorrect visibility test function assigned to snapshot

2018-05-30 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On 2018-May-30, Antonin Houska wrote: > In the header comment, SnapBuildInitialSnapshot() claims to set > snapshot->satisfies to the HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC test function, and indeed it > converts the "xid" array to match its semantics (i.e. the xid items eventually > represent running