Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Date
Msg-id 202109291252.kkmwwix5tnlo@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()  (Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2021-Sep-29, Ranier Vilela wrote:

> Em qua., 29 de set. de 2021 às 08:12, Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot@amazon.com>
> escreveu:

> > Adding a new function prevents "updating" existing extensions making use
> > of PushActiveSnapshot().
> >
> Valid argument of course.
> But the extensions should also fit the core code.
> Duplicating functions is very bad for maintenance and bloats the code
> unnecessarily, IMHO.

Well, there are 42 calls of PushActiveSnapshot currently, and only 6 are
updated in the patch.  Given that six sevenths of the calls continue to
use the existing function and that it is less verbose than the new one,
that seems sufficient argument to keep it.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera           39°49'30"S 73°17'W  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"How amazing is that? I call it a night and come back to find that a bug has
been identified and patched while I sleep."                (Robert Davidson)
               http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2006-03/msg00378.php



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] failed assertion in EnsurePortalSnapshotExists()
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench bug candidate: negative "initial connection time"