Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1pZKTJ-0008Dw-Up
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 23:42:25 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1pZKTI-0006Mn-R1
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 23:42:24 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1pZKTI-0006Me-Ic
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 23:42:24 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1pZKTG-00069H-I4
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 23:42:24 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 326NgKVl3766598;
	Mon, 6 Mar 2023 18:42:20 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #17368: Assert failed in GetSafeSnapshot() for SERIALIZABLE
 READ ONLY DEFERRABLE transaction
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+hUKGKYLSa4S7cMYgZXXA+cNTdr1COWtNj1HSc-Y62jwWmv7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17368-98a4f99e8e4b4402@postgresql.org>
 <18a116d2-7927-6a62-aa60-ab16c53183f9@gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKG+4m+fvnM_Czyp3Z_h4SaqmwR7sq9XE=k0GcaL_afEfUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKGKYLSa4S7cMYgZXXA+cNTdr1COWtNj1HSc-Y62jwWmv7w@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 07 Mar 2023 12:39:26 +1300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3766596.1678146140.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 18:42:20 -0500
Message-ID: <3766597.1678146140@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3766597.1678146140%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> As mentioned, this approach allows for more improvements in later
> patches.  There is absolutely no reason for transactions in separate
> databases to be in each others' possibleUnsafeConflicts lists.

What if they both touched/modified a shared catalog?

			regards, tom lane