On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 9:01 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:11 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 7:28 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Why do you think we can't remove
> > ReorderBufferInitialXactsSetCatalogChanges() from the back branch
> > patch? I think we don't need to change the existing function
> > ReorderBufferXidHasCatalogChanges() but instead can have a wrapper
> > like SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges() similar to master branch patch.
>
> IIUC we need to change SnapBuildCommitTxn() but it's exposed.
>
> Currently, we call like DecodeCommit() -> SnapBuildCommitTxn() ->
> ReorderBufferXidHasCatalogChanges(). If we have a wrapper function, we
> call like DecodeCommit() -> SnapBuildCommitTxn() ->
> SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges() ->
> ReorderBufferXidHasCatalogChanges(). In
> SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges(), we need to check if the transaction
> has XACT_XINFO_HAS_INVALS, which means DecodeCommit() needs to pass
> either parsed->xinfo or (parsed->xinfo & XACT_XINFO_HAS_INVALS != 0)
> down to SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges(). However, since
> SnapBuildCommitTxn(), between DecodeCommit() and
> SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges(), is exposed we cannot change it.
>
Agreed.
> Another idea would be to have functions, say
> SnapBuildCommitTxnWithXInfo() and SnapBuildCommitTxn_ext(). The latter
> does actual work of handling transaction commits and both
> SnapBuildCommitTxn() and SnapBuildCommit() call
> SnapBuildCommitTxnWithXInfo() with different arguments.
>
Do you want to say DecodeCommit() instead of SnapBuildCommit() in
above para? Yet another idea could be to have another flag
RBTXN_HAS_INVALS which will be set by DecodeCommit for top-level TXN.
Then, we can retrieve it even for each of the subtxn's if and when
required.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
