Pavan Deolasee escribió:
> Following test case gives a warning of snapshot not destroyed at commit
> time.
>
> CREATE TABLE test (a int);
> INSERT INTO test VALUES (1);
> BEGIN;
> DECLARE c CURSOR FOR SELECT * FROM test FOR update;
> SAVEPOINT A;
> FETCH -2 FROM c;
> ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT A;
> COM
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> Hmm, that's a bit problematic because resowner.c doesn't have any global
>> notion of what resource owners exist. I think you still need to have
>> snapmgr.c maintain a list of all known snapshots. resowner.c can only
>> help you
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > After the patch we don't have any way to detect whether resowner.c has
> > any snapshot still linked to. I assume there's no objection to adding a
> > new entry point in resowner.c for this.
>
> Hmm, that's a bit problematic beca
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After the patch we don't have any way to detect whether resowner.c has
> any snapshot still linked to. I assume there's no objection to adding a
> new entry point in resowner.c for this.
Hmm, that's a bit problematic because resowner.c doesn't have any
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
> The only thing I'm now missing is SnapshotResetXmin(). It currently
> looks like this:
> After the patch we don't have any way to detect whether resowner.c has
> any snapshot still linked to. I assume there's no objection to adding a
> new entry point in resowner.c f
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane escribió:
> >> I think the fundamental bug here is that you tried to skip using the
> >> ResourceOwner mechanism for snapshot references. That's basically
> >> not gonna work.
>
> > Right :-( I'll see how to go about th
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Pavan Deolasee escribió:
>> Should we call FreeQueryDesc() even for failed portals in PortalCleanup() ?
>> Or PortalDrop() is a better(right) place to do that ?
> That doesn't work; doing it causes a crash:
I think the fundamental bug here is that you
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> I think the fundamental bug here is that you tried to skip using the
>> ResourceOwner mechanism for snapshot references. That's basically
>> not gonna work.
> Right :-( I'll see how to go about this.
It strikes me that you migh
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Pavan Deolasee escribi�:
> >> Should we call FreeQueryDesc() even for failed portals in PortalCleanup() ?
> >> Or PortalDrop() is a better(right) place to do that ?
>
> > That doesn't work; doing it causes a crash:
>
> I think th
Pavan Deolasee escribió:
> Following test case gives a warning of snapshot not destroyed at commit
> time.
>
> CREATE TABLE test (a int);
> INSERT INTO test VALUES (1);
> BEGIN;
> DECLARE c CURSOR FOR SELECT * FROM test FOR update;
> SAVEPOINT A;
> FETCH -2 FROM c;
> ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT A;
> COM
Following test case gives a warning of snapshot not destroyed at commit
time.
CREATE TABLE test (a int);
INSERT INTO test VALUES (1);
BEGIN;
DECLARE c CURSOR FOR SELECT * FROM test FOR update;
SAVEPOINT A;
FETCH -2 FROM c;
ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT A;
COMMIT;
Should we call FreeQueryDesc() even for f
11 matches
Mail list logo
