MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2023 12:20:28 +0300
From: Kartyshov Ivan <i.kartyshov@postgrespro.ru>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPpHfdt=Edtk9B3owg4of6v5Y=vi6=5R9ZHM84KPOdR6mER0wg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAPpHfdtiGgn0iS1KbW2HTam-1+oK+vhXZDAcnX9hKaA7Oe=F-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <22f122-655b3e80-3-688b3700@97587957>
 <CAPpHfdt=Edtk9B3owg4of6v5Y=vi6=5R9ZHM84KPOdR6mER0wg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.6.5
Message-ID: <2c7ed9b13cf776c918234153d95a1b3c@postgrespro.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2c7ed9b13cf776c918234153d95a1b3c%40postgrespro.ru>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-11-27 03:08, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> I've retried my case with v6 and it doesn't fail anymore.  But I
> wonder how safe it is to reset xmin within the user-visible function?
> We have no guarantee that the function is not called inside the
> complex query.  Then how will the rest of the query work with xmin
> reset?  Separate utility statement still looks like more safe option
> for me.

As you mentioned, we can`t guarantee that the function is not called
inside the complex query, but we can return the xmin after waiting.
But you are right and separate utility statement still looks more safe.
So I want to bring up the discussion on separate utility statement 
again.

-- 
Ivan Kartyshov
Postgres Professional: www.postgrespro.com