3 Commits (5d8aa8bcedae7376bd97e79052d606db4e4f8dd4)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Amit Kapila	16b1fe0037	Fix assertion failures while processing NEW_CID record in logical decoding. ... When the logical decoding restarts from NEW_CID, since there is no association between the top transaction and its subtransaction, both are created as top transactions and have the same LSN. This caused the assertion failure in AssertTXNLsnOrder(). This patch skips the assertion check until we reach the LSN at which we start decoding the contents of the transaction, specifically start_decoding_at LSN in SnapBuild. This is okay because we don't guarantee to make the association between top transaction and subtransaction until we try to decode the actual contents of transaction. The ordering of the records prior to the start_decoding_at LSN should have been checked before the restart. The other assertion failure is due to the reason that we forgot to track that we have considered top-level transaction id in the list of catalog changing transactions that were committed when one of its subtransactions is marked as containing catalog change. Reported-by: Tomas Vondra, Osumi Takamichi Author: Masahiko Sawada, Kuroda Hayato Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila, Dilip Kumar, Kuroda Hayato, Kyotaro Horiguchi, Masahiko Sawada Backpatch-through: 10 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/a89b46b6-0239-2fd5-71a9-b19b1f7a7145%40enterprisedb.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/TYCPR01MB83733C6CEAE47D0280814D5AED7A9%40TYCPR01MB8373.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com	3 years ago
Amit Kapila	d2169c9985	Fix the incorrect assertion introduced in commit 7f13ac8123. ... It has been incorrectly assumed in commit 7f13ac8123 that we can either purge all or none in the catalog modifying xids list retrieved from a serialized snapshot. It is quite possible that some of the xids in that array are old enough to be pruned but not others. As per buildfarm Author: Amit Kapila and Masahiko Sawada Reviwed-by: Masahiko Sawada Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1LBtv6ayE+TvCcPmC-xse=DVg=SmbyQD1nv_AaqcpUJEg@mail.gmail.com	3 years ago
Amit Kapila	7f13ac8123	Fix catalog lookup with the wrong snapshot during logical decoding. ... Previously, we relied on HEAP2_NEW_CID records and XACT_INVALIDATION records to know if the transaction has modified the catalog, and that information is not serialized to snapshot. Therefore, after the restart, if the logical decoding decodes only the commit record of the transaction that has actually modified a catalog, we will miss adding its XID to the snapshot. Thus, we will end up looking at catalogs with the wrong snapshot. To fix this problem, this change adds the list of transaction IDs and sub-transaction IDs, that have modified catalogs and are running during snapshot serialization, to the serialized snapshot. After restart or otherwise, when we restore from such a serialized snapshot, the corresponding list is restored in memory. Now, when decoding a COMMIT record, we check both the list and the ReorderBuffer to see if the transaction has modified catalogs. Since this adds additional information to the serialized snapshot, we cannot backpatch it. For back branches, we took another approach. We remember the last-running-xacts list of the decoded RUNNING_XACTS record after restoring the previously serialized snapshot. Then, we mark the transaction as containing catalog changes if it's in the list of initial running transactions and its commit record has XACT_XINFO_HAS_INVALS. This doesn't require any file format changes but the transaction will end up being added to the snapshot even if it has only relcache invalidations. But that won't be a problem since we use snapshot built during decoding only to read system catalogs. This commit bumps SNAPBUILD_VERSION because of a change in SnapBuild. Reported-by: Mike Oh Author: Masahiko Sawada Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila, Shi yu, Takamichi Osumi, Kyotaro Horiguchi, Bertrand Drouvot, Ahsan Hadi Backpatch-through: 10 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/81D0D8B0-E7C4-4999-B616-1E5004DBDCD2%40amazon.com	3 years ago