Thanks Masahiko for the updated patch. It looks good to me. I wonder whether the logic should be, similar to ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo() if (xlrec->subxid_overflow) ... else if (xlrec->subxcnt > 0) ...
But you may ignore it. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 7:41 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 10:13 PM Ashutosh Bapat > <ashutosh.bapat....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 6:44 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I realized that standby_desc_running_xacts() in standbydesc.c doesn't > > > describe subtransaction XIDs. I've attached the patch to improve the > > > description. Here is an example by pg_wlaldump: > > > > > > * HEAD > > > rmgr: Standby len (rec/tot): 58/ 58, tx: 0, lsn: > > > 0/01D0C608, prev 0/01D0C5D8, desc: RUNNING_XACTS nextXid 1050 > > > latestCompletedXid 1047 oldestRunningXid 1048; 1 xacts: 1048 > > > > > > * w/ patch > > > rmgr: Standby len (rec/tot): 58/ 58, tx: 0, lsn: > > > 0/01D0C608, prev 0/01D0C5D8, desc: RUNNING_XACTS nextXid 1050 > > > latestCompletedXid 1047 oldestRunningXid 1048; 1 xacts: 1048; 1 > > > subxacts: 1049 > > > > > > > I think this is a good addition to debugging info. +1 > > > > If we are going to add 64 subxid numbers then it would help if we > > could be more verbose and print "subxid overflowed" instead of "subxid > > ovf". > > Yeah, it looks better so agreed. I've attached an updated patch. > > Regards, > > -- > Masahiko Sawada > EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/ >
