MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Zwkk9Z6rzNxArr1p@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAD21AoB31apHCzZ-45rDtB56qQm+TBwJnB48JjBvuqR5xviAEQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD21AoD+opO0SaDSFvz+n+wAxc-kUrpF5Wtxbw80Bqpay+rkgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PsYdTW4+U+fioh9_yO8iT6RnY=PquzfCZu7zRU6Qg6W7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zwy4ys76aPcoVE/I@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAD21AoDuO87MFrPJFwtmRi=cFhDGac0zq7sq5pdEhVi7zUvbEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5qbxud4pvnvmtuoi7weiizm5hmumxaeohx4vztfhrwlfhyz6rj@buh4435mllwo>
 <CAD21AoBM6vAcPGR-ng0nqGG0yemR_ufdg3+v3gkPa6Nc2ntnrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Z8f6dQPR67ahM2DN@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAA4eK1L0bZbZOr8-VNFXDfqaTwggdf_-HTAsneui+_ozMTvZQg@mail.gmail.com> <Z8g9/GeoXv/gIL60@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
In-Reply-To: <Z8g9/GeoXv/gIL60@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 13:48:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD21AoBkdiq6Te7D_LtKDDB2WsZWBKWqWNVguhy9R_xAMf_xDg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Add contrib/pg_logicalsnapinspect
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, 
	Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, 
	shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>, 
	Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoBkdiq6Te7D_LtKDDB2WsZWBKWqWNVguhy9R_xAMf_xDg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:05=E2=80=AFAM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 02:42:15PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 12:47=E2=80=AFPM Bertrand Drouvot
> > <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Agree, PFA a patch doing so.
> > >
> >
> > It would be better if you could add a few comments atop the
> > permutation line to explain the working of the test.
>
> yeah makes sense. Done in the attached, and bonus point I realized that t=
he
> test could be simplified (so, removing useless steps in passing).
>

Thank you for the patch.

The new simplified test case can be pretty-formatted as:

init
begin
savepoint
truncate
                checkpoint-1
                get_changes-1
commit
                checkpoint-2
                get_changes-2
                info_catchange check
                info_committed check
                meta check

IIUC if another checkpoint happens between get_change-2 and the
subsequent checks, the first snapshot would be removed during the
checkpoint, resulting in a test failure. I think we could check the
snapshot files while one transaction keeps open. The more simplified
test case would be:

init
begin
savepoint
insert(cat-change)
                begin
                insert(cat-change)
                commit
                checkpoint
                get_changes
                info_catchange check
                info_committed check
                meta check
commit

In this test case, we would have at least one serialized snapshot that
has both cat-changes and committed txns. What do you think?

Regards,

--=20
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com