| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: assertion in 9.4 with wal_level=logical |
| Date: | 2014-04-18 15:03:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20140418150302.GC5822@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-04-18 11:50:55 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > It's a bit painful that HeapTupleHeaderGetUpdateXid allocates memory,
> > but to fix that we would have to remove all allocations from
> > GetMultiXactIdMembers which doesn't sound feasible.
>
> I was thinking for a second we could just allocate something during
> startup based on max_connections (+ other possible backends), but I
> think that won't work because of subtransactions?
Yeah, I don't think the number of members in a multixact is bound.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-18 15:06:21 | Re: DISCARD ALL (Again) |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-04-18 15:01:41 | Re: DISCARD ALL (Again) |