On 2022-Nov-23, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I suggest that we could improve that elog() so that it includes the
> members of the multixact in question, which could help us better
> understand what is going on.
Something like the attached. It would result in output like this:
WARNING: new multixact has more than one updating member: 0 2[17378 (keysh), 17381 (nokeyupd)]
Then it should be possible to trace (in pg_waldump output) the
operations of each of the transactions that have any status in the
multixact that includes some form of "upd".
--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Just treat us the way you want to be treated + some extra allowance
for ignorance." (Michael Brusser)
