Re: BUG #16233: Yet another "logical replication worker" wasterminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault
От | Johann du Toit |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #16233: Yet another "logical replication worker" wasterminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAO7Fzi5c10PSu4ndOMB-a5uf9Ww_rTc4AbcShEkQ38X+X=2eMg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #16233: Yet another "logical replication worker" wasterminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault (Johann du Toit <johann@winkreports.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 11:57, Johann du Toit <johann@winkreports.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 03:28, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > The stack trace does look the same, but do you have the same triggering > > condition we identified (that is, fairly wide column values in the > > subscriber table that are not getting replaced during a > > logical-replication update? or possibly dropped columns in the > > subscriber table?) > > Thanks Tom. > > I don't really think it's the same triggering condition. How wide is > "fairly wide"? > > I also saw in the previous thread you were asking Tomas to show the > attribute list to check for dropped columns. This is not a long-term > replication - I'm just trying to do a zero downtime upgrade (which has > worked fine using pglogical on older postgresql versions). So my > schema from the publisher is exported and loaded into the subscriber > "fresh" and no schema changes are done at all. > > I was able to get a deb package built using a recent V12 Stable source > snapshot. I'm trying that as I'm typing this - will report back if it > crashed out as well. 24 hours later and the full replication succeeded using the latest V12_STABLE branch patch. I did some tests of the larger tables and the number of records and columns all seem to match. So while I still don't think it's the same triggering mechanism, the patch did solve the problem. Regards, -J
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: