Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160706233336.irsrxqct3lc5vcwp@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple
Re: BUG #14150: Attempted to delete invisible tuple |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 2016-07-06 16:07:38 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa <os@aiven.io> wrote: > >> ISTM this is caused by toast knowing nothing about speculative > >> insertion: when two backends have executed a speculative heap_insert > >> with a conflicting key and the latter one tries to abort after receiving > >> specConflict there's nothing in tqual.c to say that the toast rows > >> associated with speculative insertion should be visible to that operation. > > > > > > The attached patch against current master allows heap_abort_speculative to > > delete toast rows created by the same command which makes the above test > > case and "make check" run without failures. Note that I haven't touched > > this code before so I don't know how safe my patch is. > > I don't really understand your explanation of what this patch does. > Obviously heap_abort_speculative() often has no apparent problem with > any of this; this bug involves a relatively rare race condition > scenario where there *is* a problem. Did you see oskari's reproducer in http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/88248a24-47d1-d575-a63f-2b56a09f82e2%40aiven.io ? It's not really particularly hard to reproduce with that (pretty basic interaction). Works like in 80% of the cases I tried, within less than a sec. > We didn't simply neglect to make heap_abort_speculative() consider > TOAST at all, though. Well, not quite, but nearly. Afaics it currently can only work if the toasted columns have been inserted by a different command, before the INSERT ON CONFLICT does anything. I don't see how it can work for newly inserted toast data. When heap_abort_speculative deletes toast data, when would it *ever* not fail if the same command executed the toast data? Andres
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: