From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV in BRIN autosummarize
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 12:08:05 -0500
Message-ID: <20171015170805.GA15756@telsasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171015015656.GC22678@telsasoft.com>
References: <20171014035732.GB31726@telsasoft.com>
<20171014224220.GB22678@telsasoft.com>
<74e6535c-4a96-6a3f-1e04-3068106c6f59@2ndquadrant.com>
<20171015015656.GC22678@telsasoft.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 08:56:56PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:57:32PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > Also notice the vacuum process was interrupted, same as yesterday (think
> > > goodness for full logs). Our INSERT script is using python
> > > multiprocessing.pool() with "maxtasksperchild=1", which I think means we load
> > > one file and then exit the subprocess, and pool() creates a new subproc, which
> > > starts a new PG session and transaction. Which explains why autovacuum starts
> > > processing the table only to be immediately interrupted.
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 01:57:14AM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > I don't follow. Why does it explain that autovacuum gets canceled? I
> > mean, merely opening a new connection/session should not cancel
> > autovacuum. That requires a command that requires table-level lock
> > conflicting with autovacuum (so e.g. explicit LOCK command, DDL, ...).
>
> I was thinking that INSERT would do it, but I gather you're right about
> autovacuum. Let me get back to you about this..
I confirmed that we're taking an explicit lock before creating new child tables
(as I recall, to avoid errors in the logs shortly after midnight when multiple
subprocesses see data for the new date for the first time):
2017-10-15 12:52:50.499-04 | 59e3925e.6951 | statement: LOCK TABLE cdrs_huawei_sgsnPDPRecord IN SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE MODE
Probably we can improve that with LOCK TABLE ONLY.
Justin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pryzby@telsasoft.com, tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV in BRIN autosummarize
In-Reply-To: <20171015170805.GA15756@telsasoft.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox