MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMbWs4-mWCGbbE_bne5=AfqjYGDaUZmjCw2+soLjrdNA0xUDFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zi8pC2WkIL56cHmj@paquier.xyz> <1068977.1714367460@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <Zi8vNgPIaeUP5-iM@paquier.xyz> <1076837.1714368760@sss.pgh.pa.us> <Zi9E9h-S2cRkumqb@paquier.xyz>
In-Reply-To: <Zi9E9h-S2cRkumqb@paquier.xyz>
From: Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:11:19 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMbWs48uTLZT14aaBaEg7cpB6ercU5wm9+WfGLGC3VoP28gfCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, 
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009c1c5a061738a329"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAMbWs48uTLZT14aaBaEg7cpB6ercU5wm9%2BWfGLGC3VoP28gfCA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--0000000000009c1c5a061738a329
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:58=E2=80=AFPM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xy=
z> 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

--0000000000009c1c5a061738a329
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:58=E2=80=AFPM M=
ichael Paquier &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:michael@paquier.xyz">michael@paquier.x=
yz</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex=
">On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 01:32:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:<br>
&gt; (BTW, on the same logic, should ecpg&#39;s twophase.pgc be using a<br>
&gt; prepared-transaction name that&#39;s less generic than &quot;gxid&quot=
;?)<br>
<br>
I&#39;ve hesitated a few seconds about that before sending my patch, but<br=
>
refrained because this stuff does not care about the contents of<br>
pg_prepared_xacts.=C2=A0 I&#39;d be OK to use something like an &quot;ecpg_=
regress&quot;<br>
or something similar there.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I noticed that =
some TAP tests from recovery and subscription would<br>select the count fro=
m pg_prepared_xacts.=C2=A0 I wonder if these tests would<br>be affected if =
there are any prepared transactions on the backend.<br><br>Thanks<br>Richar=
d<br></div></div></div>

--0000000000009c1c5a061738a329--