Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639)
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1K6XH3ZfWn1v53OL1pRrRHik3zBbKCcJcED2Y8kBu5rEw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639)  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639)  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 4:47 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 1:08 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 11:58 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I've attached two patches that need to be back-patched to all branches
> > > and includes Change-1, Change-2, and a test case for them. FYI this
> > > patch resolves the assertion failure reported in this thread as well
> > > as one reported in another thread[2]. So I borrowed some of the
> > > changes from the patch[2] Osumi-san recently proposed.
> > >
> >
> > Amit pointed out offlist that the changes in reorderbuffer.c is not
> > pgindent'ed. I've run pgindent and attached updated patches.
> >
>
> Thanks, I have tested these across all branches till v10 and it works
> as expected. I am planning to push this tomorrow unless I see any
> further comments.
>

Pushed.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoid memory leaks during base backups
Next
From: Marcos Pegoraro
Date:
Subject: ​session_user and current_user on LOG