public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Richard Guo <[email protected]>
To: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:11:19 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMbWs48uTLZT14aaBaEg7cpB6ercU5wm9+WfGLGC3VoP28gfCA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAMbWs4-mWCGbbE_bne5=AfqjYGDaUZmjCw2+soLjrdNA0xUDFw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:58 PM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 01:32:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > (BTW, on the same logic, should ecpg's twophase.pgc be using a
> > prepared-transaction name that's less generic than "gxid"?)
>
> I've hesitated a few seconds about that before sending my patch, but
> refrained because this stuff does not care about the contents of
> pg_prepared_xacts. I'd be OK to use something like an "ecpg_regress"
> or something similar there.
I noticed that some TAP tests from recovery and subscription would
select the count from pg_prepared_xacts. I wonder if these tests would
be affected if there are any prepared transactions on the backend.
Thanks
Richard
view thread (21+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test
In-Reply-To: <CAMbWs48uTLZT14aaBaEg7cpB6ercU5wm9+WfGLGC3VoP28gfCA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox