Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it. - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it.
Date
Msg-id 20190104131351.GF2067@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it.  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 05:18:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm.  I can reproduce this if I start in a virgin database, but not
> otherwise.  I think the problem is that the prepared transaction has
> created the pg_temp_NN schema for its session, and therefore there
> is an uncommitted pg_namespace entry for that schema name, and the
> second session is also trying to create that schema (because it has
> the same backend ID) so it blocks waiting to see if that index
> entry commits.

That should not be allowed to commit directly.  I think that we should
just add a new value for MyXactFlags which tracks the transaction
where the temporary namespace has been created, and generate an error
if trying to use 2PC in this case.  A separate flag looks necessary to
me so as we don't bump on "cannot PREPARE a transaction that has
operated on temporary tables" in this case.  That would be
back-patchable, and if both XACT_FLAGS_ACCESSEDTEMPREL and the new
flag are set then we just blow up on the original error message when
committing.

Opinions?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Alexey Bashtanov
Date:
Subject: Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found someissues with it.
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15555: Syntax errors when using the COMMENT command inplpgsql and a "comment" variable