Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Muhammad Usama |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CAEJvTzWtquth+NgS3XOsg-s8dr3yjdNPi1ocsEQ_nuMEPQM4MQ@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 (Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
|
| List | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:42 PM Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 01:55, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2020/07/16 14:47, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 11:19, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2020/07/14 9:08, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> >>>> I've attached the latest version patches. I've incorporated the review
> >>>> comments I got so far and improved locking strategy.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for updating the patch!
> >>
> >> +1
> >> I'm interested in these patches and now studying them. While checking
> >> the behaviors of the patched PostgreSQL, I got three comments.
> >
> > Thank you for testing this patch!
> >
> >>
> >> 1. We can access to the foreign table even during recovery in the HEAD.
> >> But in the patched version, when I did that, I got the following error.
> >> Is this intentional?
> >>
> >> ERROR: cannot assign TransactionIds during recovery
> >
> > No, it should be fixed. I'm going to fix this by not collecting
> > participants for atomic commit during recovery.
>
> Thanks for trying to fix the issues!
>
> I'd like to report one more issue. When I started new transaction
> in the local server, executed INSERT in the remote server via
> postgres_fdw and then quit psql, I got the following assertion failure.
>
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("fdwxact", File: "fdwxact.c", Line: 1570)
> 0 postgres 0x000000010d52f3c0 ExceptionalCondition + 160
> 1 postgres 0x000000010cefbc49 ForgetAllFdwXactParticipants + 313
> 2 postgres 0x000000010cefff14 AtProcExit_FdwXact + 20
> 3 postgres 0x000000010d313fe3 shmem_exit + 179
> 4 postgres 0x000000010d313e7a proc_exit_prepare + 122
> 5 postgres 0x000000010d313da3 proc_exit + 19
> 6 postgres 0x000000010d35112f PostgresMain + 3711
> 7 postgres 0x000000010d27bb3a BackendRun + 570
> 8 postgres 0x000000010d27af6b BackendStartup + 475
> 9 postgres 0x000000010d279ed1 ServerLoop + 593
> 10 postgres 0x000000010d277940 PostmasterMain + 6016
> 11 postgres 0x000000010d1597b9 main + 761
> 12 libdyld.dylib 0x00007fff7161e3d5 start + 1
> 13 ??? 0x0000000000000003 0x0 + 3
>
Thank you for reporting the issue!
I've attached the latest version patch that incorporated all comments
I got so far. I've removed the patch adding the 'prefer' mode of
foreign_twophase_commit to keep the patch set simple.
I have started to review the patchset. Just a quick comment.
Patch v24-0002-Support-atomic-commit-among-multiple-foreign-ser.patch
contains changes (adding fdwxact includes) for
src/backend/executor/nodeForeignscan.c, src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
src/backend/executor/nodeForeignscan.c, src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
and src/backend/executor/execPartition.c files that doesn't seem to be
required with the latest version.
Thanks
Best regards
Muhammad Usama
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
pgsql-hackers by date: