Re: [BUGS] BUG #14830: Missed NOTIFications, PostgreSQL 9.1.24
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14830: Missed NOTIFications, PostgreSQL 9.1.24 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20171010140621.u4avva4cxylwpyew@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14830: Missed NOTIFications, PostgreSQL 9.1.24 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUGS] BUG #14830: Missed NOTIFications, PostgreSQL 9.1.24
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Tom Lane wrote: > Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> writes: > > So I managed to accidentally kill and/or restart both servers while trying > > to install debug symbols, but I'm doing a new run now and I noticed > > something interesting: the listening backend's RecentXmin doesn't seem to > > ever go forward. By my reading of this code, that would mean trouble for > > this piece of code in TransactionIdIsInProgress: > > > if (TransactionIdPrecedes(xid, RecentXmin)) > > return false; > > Hmm ... I suppose it's possible that that happens if the listening > backend isn't executing any SQL commands but is just sitting. > While that might describe your test harness, does it describe any > real-world application? I think it's not totally unreasonable to have processes sitting idle for long periods of time. One example: a pooler configured to have more connections that are actually needed most of the time (I'm fairly sure I've seen this). Would they not recompute RecentXmin if they did a sinval reset? Also, a listener daemon for which notifications are very infrequent. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: