On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Yeah, that was plenty silly. Updated patch attached.
Looks good me to, except for this warning:
snapmgr.c: In function 'RegisterSnapshot':
snapmgr.c:356: warning: unused variable 'snap'
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan
Pavan Deolasee escribió:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Yeah, that was plenty silly. Updated patch attached.
Looks good me to, except for this warning:
Applied. Many thanks for the exhaustive testing.
--
Alvaro Herrera
The following test flashes snapshot leak warning and subsequently dumps
core. Though this looks very similar to other bug report, this is a
different issue.
postgres=# BEGIN TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE ;
BEGIN
postgres=# SAVEPOINT A;
SAVEPOINT
postgres=# SELECT count(*) from
Pavan Deolasee escribió:
2. In CommitTransaction(), I think we should call AtEOXact_Snapshot *before*
releasing the resource owners. Otherwise, ResourceOwnerReleaseInternal
complains about snapshot leak and then forcefully unregisters the snapshot.
Later when AtEOXact_Snapshot is called, it
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. In CommitTransaction(), I think we should call AtEOXact_Snapshot *before*
releasing the resource owners.
That's absolutely wrong. It'll complain about whatever snapshots the
owners still hold.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
Pavan Deolasee escribió:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's absolutely wrong. It'll complain about whatever snapshots the
owners still hold.
You must be right; I don't understand that code much. But don't we expect
the snapshots to be cleanly
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Yeah, we need two at-commit routines, one of which needs to be called
early. I'm prepping a patch.
Here it is ... the large object patch is also included. I've created
new functions to specify the resource owner to register a snapshot in;
now that there are two
