On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 7:05 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 4:08 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > --- a/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c > > +++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c > > @@ -113,6 +113,15 @@ > > LogicalDecodingProcessRecord(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, > > XLogReaderState *recor > > buf.origptr); > > } > > > > +#ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING > > + /* > > + * Check the order of transaction LSNs when we reached the start decoding > > + * LSN. See the comments in AssertTXNLsnOrder() for details. > > + */ > > + if (SnapBuildGetStartDecodingAt(ctx->snapshot_builder) == buf.origptr) > > + AssertTXNLsnOrder(ctx->reorder); > > +#endif > > + > > rmgr = GetRmgr(XLogRecGetRmid(record)); > > > > > > > I am not able to think how/when this check will be useful. Because we > > skipped assert checking only for records that are prior to > > start_decoding_at point, I think for those records ordering should > > have been checked before the restart. start_decoding_at point will be > > either (a) confirmed_flush location, or (b) lsn sent by client, and > > any record prior to that must have been processed before restart. > > Good point. I was considering the case where the client sets far ahead > LSN but it's not worth considering this case in this context. I've > updated the patch accoringly. >
One minor comment: Can we slightly change the comment: ". The ordering of the records prior to the LSN, we should have been checked before the restart." to ". The ordering of the records prior to the start_decoding_at LSN should have been checked before the restart."? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
