Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
Date
Msg-id CAEepm=3WQYdz4YUhiKk4Oq-FxUw-1oBf+c_3-Rx4ygC0K9ZEPg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Haribabu Kommi
> <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for explaining the problem in generating an isolation test to
>> test the serialize parallel query.
>>
>> Committer can decide whether existing test is fine to part of the test suite
>> or remove it, other than that everything is fine. so I am moving the patch
>> into "ready for committer" state.
>
> Thank you!  I will try to find a good benchmark that will really
> exercise parallel query + SSI.

This started crashing some time yesterday with an assertion failure in
the isolation tests after commit 2badb5af landed.  Reordering of code
in parallel.c confused patch's fuzz heuristics leading
SetSerializableXact() to be called too soon.  Here's a fix for that.

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: copy.c allocation constant