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 ) id 1oE08c-0002rg-Sg for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 03:12:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oE07d-0003F2-OS for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 03:11:37 +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 ) id 1oE07d-0003Es-Do for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 03:11:37 +0000 Received: from mail-yw1-x1134.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oE07a-000852-SD for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 03:11:37 +0000 Received: by mail-yw1-x1134.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-2ef5380669cso160220057b3.9 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 20:11:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lQFcr9yPg3FV1tWGVIv3QWD7Fl05EWuq3kkHPZeORII=; b=EWorHie4IQlh+RocLroMRzWPfX/j/VgnypZABc9UGC3H7t6aZfFCOhULrqiLgKihgl kRDEW55fWKNE22+RiUsOg6t6Wm/uQMco5ufqT1daOLu/+mz9DNtND7mBKJyhiUlVzg/J f5ST3M1/ml+71L2YQfLqLT41Tv4KjBQvQAvAvKOX9cs1uh7pA/KjDfNyo93fcHGyPElT 6BwTRL9j2UY/0+jne3pUSUh7iOIUqjRXV0vzP6Pc2umegA+Bb3jY5/DXbjvq62+BVuYM GU/FwkCn0VkoZrX/IiA7Cvr+tEuDBucYlZRW9GnMZCmeZcP5o3/1DDrzUx7fm83U1OUz dJfA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lQFcr9yPg3FV1tWGVIv3QWD7Fl05EWuq3kkHPZeORII=; b=aXa+DMP6aGNYU8nPQJNEiLB+WLAAvwBC2zSbbcn3CIb5onqPn+ML3Q3sV0UkHu2s9x jveoQp/UAQKOy/bGGIDxNaYgNdvaktHn74WkQSaD2f8A3jQT9oW4nf7lm09h2oFvR8cC fbALHrYbErLweOA0XkD3iITFfCWezfNVPgWIsm/J3wa7pqS9NrahSd1zvpMpt4IYO6Mn h9fYIJyySKAkoxvNomIiCSjTFnQN6+HGOTbevknhKvPJPK32cYBVMUxuZlJEefV9OPO1 bWv1dGSmLU+PC5E7y/ZzmWIPpSUoxMiaUJ/VZ3Bk2YyRji5fo6eQTyRw76cfsiIYxQUQ EoKw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/bJYOD8p26abL0ax4Qpp8ZjyELnUdrC1jY1MzVG+URi5emvaTp Gm0Kyc3L945u/wXwEBxiS6eyLs3o+9GPHAa+i73cQfwDHVI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vJ6ugNOHlRpe0SEO8VbYRB9C21Y55QipEJnaw5oesTtbHEkL5hhqSJKtxA/s4zKoAj8Jlz4KVye5jfEZpEg88= X-Received: by 2002:a81:144:0:b0:31c:af69:28c2 with SMTP id 65-20020a810144000000b0031caf6928c2mr38443089ywb.305.1658286692749; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 20:11:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211008.165055.1621145185927268721.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> <20220523.133323.444599955292141474.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Amit Kapila Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 08:41:21 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns To: Masahiko Sawada Cc: "shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com" , Kyotaro Horiguchi , "Drouvot, Bertrand" , PostgreSQL Hackers , "Oh, Mike" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 7:28 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 9:25 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 1:10 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > > > > > BTW on backbranches, I think that the reason why we add > > > initial_running_xacts stuff to ReorderBuffer is that we cannot modify > > > SnapBuild that could be serialized. Can we add a (private) array for > > > the initial running xacts in snapbuild.c instead of adding new > > > variables to ReorderBuffer? > > > > > > > While thinking about this, I wonder if the current patch for back > > branches can lead to an ABI break as it changes the exposed structure? > > If so, it may be another reason to change it to some other way > > probably as you are suggesting. > > Yeah, it changes the size of ReorderBuffer, which is not good. > So, are you planning to give a try with your idea of making a private array for the initial running xacts? I am not sure but I guess you are proposing to add it in SnapBuild structure, if so, that seems safe as that structure is not exposed. > Changing the function names and arguments would also break ABI. So > probably we cannot do the above idea of removing > ReorderBufferInitialXactsSetCatalogChanges() as well. > Why do you think we can't remove ReorderBufferInitialXactsSetCatalogChanges() from the back branch patch? I think we don't need to change the existing function ReorderBufferXidHasCatalogChanges() but instead can have a wrapper like SnapBuildXidHasCatalogChanges() similar to master branch patch. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.