Re: Two-phase update of restart_lsn in LogicalConfirmReceivedLocation

2018-03-07 Thread Craig Ringer
On 8 March 2018 at 07:32, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Craig Ringer > wrote: > >> So I can't say it's definitely impossible. It seems astonishingly > unlikely, > >> but that's not always good enough. > > > Race conditions tend to happen a lot more of

Re: Two-phase update of restart_lsn in LogicalConfirmReceivedLocation

2018-03-07 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: >> So I can't say it's definitely impossible. It seems astonishingly unlikely, >> but that's not always good enough. > Race conditions tend to happen a lot more often than one might think. Just to back that up --- we've s

Re: Two-phase update of restart_lsn in LogicalConfirmReceivedLocation

2018-03-07 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > So I can't say it's definitely impossible. It seems astonishingly unlikely, > but that's not always good enough. Race conditions tend to happen a lot more often than one might think. If there's a theoretical opportunity for this to go wrong, i

Re: Two-phase update of restart_lsn in LogicalConfirmReceivedLocation

2018-02-28 Thread Craig Ringer
On 1 March 2018 at 13:39, Arseny Sher wrote: > Hello, > > In LogicalConfirmReceivedLocation two fields (data.catalog_xmin and > effective_catalog_xmin) of ReplicationSlot structure are used for > advancing xmin of the slot. This allows to avoid hole when tuples might > already have been vacuumed,