On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 4:00 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > About 0001, have we tried to reproduce the actual bug here which means
> > > > when the error_callback is called we should face some problem? I feel
> > > > with the correct testcase we should hit the Assert
> > > > (Assert(IsTransactionState());) in SearchCatCacheInternal because
> > > > there we expect the transaction to be in a valid state. I understand
> > > > that the transaction is in a broken state at that time but having a
> > > > testcase to hit the actual bug makes it easy to test the fix.
> > >
> > > I have not tried hitting the Assert(IsTransactionState() in
> > > SearchCatCacheInternal. To do that, I need to figure out hitting
> > > "incorrect binary data format in logical replication column" error in
> > > either slot_modify_data or slot_store_data so that we will enter the
> > > error callback slot_store_error_callback and then IsTransactionState()
> > > should return false i.e. txn shouldn't be in TRANS_INPROGRESS.
> > >
> >
> > Even, if you hit that via debugger it will be sufficient or you can
> > write another elog/ereport there to achieve the same. The exact test
> > case to hit that error is not mandatory.
>
> Thanks Amit. I verified it with gdb. I attached gdb to the logical
> replication worker. In slot_store_data's for loop, I intentionally set
> CurrentTransactionState->state = TRANS_DEFAULT,
>
What happens if you don't change CurrentTransactionState->state?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
