Re: ERROR: subtransaction logged without previous top-level txn record - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: ERROR: subtransaction logged without previous top-level txn record
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1LdNmrib1jub8b=KvYUrzXW0VT4P3MVPMyiMfMY3K64dA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ERROR: subtransaction logged without previous top-level txn record  (Arseny Sher <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: ERROR: subtransaction logged without previous top-level txn record  (Arseny Sher <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 2:50 PM Arseny Sher <a.sher@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>
> Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> I don't see a bug here. At least in reproduced scenario I see false
> >> alert, as explained above: transaction with skipped xl_xact_assignment
> >> won't be streamed as it finishes before confirmed_flush_lsn.
> >>
> >
> > Does this guarantee come from the fact that we need to wait for such a
> > transaction before reaching a consistent snapshot state?  If not, can
> > you explain a bit more what makes you say so?
>
> Right, see FULL_SNAPSHOT -> SNAPBUILD_CONSISTENT transition -- it exists
> exactly for this purpose: once we have good snapshot, we need to wait
> for all running xacts to finish to see all xacts we are promising to
> stream in full.
>

So, doesn't this mean that it started occurring after the fix done in
commit 96b5033e11 [1]?  Because before that fix we wouldn't have
allowed processing XLOG_XACT_ASSIGNMENT records unless we are in
SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT state.  I am not telling the fix in that
commit is wrong, but just trying to understand the situation here.

>
> Well, almost. This is true as long initial snapshot construction process
> goes the long way of building the snapshot by itself. If it happens to
> pick up from disk ready snapshot pickled there by another decoding
> session, it fast path'es to SNAPBUILD_CONSISTENT, which is technically a
> bug as described in
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87ftjifoql.fsf%40ars-thinkpad
>

Can't we deal with this separately?  If so, I think let's not mix the
discussions for both as the root cause of both seems different.


[1] -
 commit bac2fae05c7737530a6fe8276cd27d210d25c6ac
 Author: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Date:   2019-09-13 16:36:28 -0300

     logical decoding: process ASSIGNMENT during snapshot build



-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #16240: The now() function is populating different date time than expected
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Unable to trigger createdb