Re: logical decoding / rewrite map vs. maxAllocatedDescs
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: logical decoding / rewrite map vs. maxAllocatedDescs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9552a9ef-250d-c7bf-abca-0c0533215fee@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: logical decoding / rewrite map vs. maxAllocatedDescs (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: logical decoding / rewrite map vs. maxAllocatedDescs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/14/2018 01:49 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 08/13/2018 04:49 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 2018-08-13 11:46:30 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> On 2018-Aug-11, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>> >>>> Hmmm, it's difficult to compare "bt full" output, but my backtraces >>>> look >>>> somewhat different (and all the backtraces I'm seeing are 100% exactly >>>> the same). Attached for comparison. >>> >>> Hmm, looks similar enough to me -- at the bottom you have the executor >>> doing its thing, then an AcceptInvalidationMessages in the middle >>> section atop which sit a few more catalog accesses, and further up from >>> that you have another AcceptInvalidationMessages with more catalog >>> accesses. AFAICS that's pretty much the same thing Andres was >>> describing. >> >> It's somewhat different because it doesn't seem to involve a reload of a >> nailed table, which my traces did. I wasn't able to reproduce the crash >> more than once, so I'm not at all sure how to properly verify the issue. >> I'd appreciate if Thomas could try to do so again with the small patch I >> provided. >> > > I'll try in the evening. I've tried reproducing it on my laptop, but I > can't make that happen for some reason - I know I've seen some crashes > here, but all the reproducers were from the workstation I have at home. > > I wonder if there's some subtle difference between the two boxes, making > it more likely on one of them ... the whole environment (distribution, > packages, compiler, ...) should be exactly the same, though. The only > thing I can think of is different CPU speed, possibly making some race > conditions more/less likely. No idea. > I take that back - I can reproduce the crashes, both with and without the patch, all the way back to 9.6. Attached is a bunch of backtraces from various versions. There's a bit of variability depending on which pgbench script gets started first (insert.sql or vacuum.sql) - in one case (when vacuum is started before insert) the crash happens in InitPostgres/RelationCacheInitializePhase3, otherwise it happens in exec_simple_query. Another observation is that the failing COPY is not necessary, I can reproduce the crashes without this (so even with wal_level=replica). regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: