Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iBKs3-0005rd-UV for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:30:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iBKs2-0005Sj-KM for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:30:54 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iBKs2-0005Sa-8d for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:30:54 +0000 Received: from mail-wm1-x344.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::344]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iBKrz-0002mC-Va for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:30:53 +0000 Received: by mail-wm1-x344.google.com with SMTP id b24so2668929wmj.5 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=2ndquadrant-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=J+o9PE/Jo0i0j5XXc8JR8nxsZLyGAe1eCj5iNn+9fro=; b=Gdjn4uDCd1ePBk75xvd8L4brjWzv1FOsPAa6VQS8+Kcb7gKFrfdKx+W7zn3wKW+S07 8XN5Jr7lbEjEhcIvQlD1QQqGkOQQ20u9bNKvRy0aXKpA1iGE8ruGUR2U/b/ocYuRwRwl jhus0DFT5aWqlC+wrSlt38UDWNEDTTWjtYD+0XlR1PlAEnqs7i8ca2TONuN3svC7nkYg i34c8iLTzmeE9Q6TMto97wNe3FUeXG3AZZrvRFi6IURucA5eEq+0fV71qWIcpH2UEjpp fUs4KKi5PxF3jmFjS3jyf1AEqYLbVpz6wdEP5bFvbP5/YuvTKHV9CL0t62B2l1Fg7U8f sI8A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=J+o9PE/Jo0i0j5XXc8JR8nxsZLyGAe1eCj5iNn+9fro=; b=HbGbMgbUZ3zG9wB2DOyz4XUEmtJcFmw+7+wy3rZKPQ4GqKEPLDXHjaUeaVgkHiH+8R pbx+Cavv4L7vLS9aJWZ59a84DXrMuiz3VKjvXeZtr1Rh5VaE0FXbCFbe7Hjge1BzFlGU MZVHAWW8PZEUzO01l7hMJD4yk30aSoXcojJBMnHJv0f6n/+W7+WNtJ1lp1TNWKP6ETZS LX237NetBBur09aCfU8QA2C5xYEvj0ofevWmWvCKsYaF1Wu6SCmei/TjMq/rjiHOtubt aAxE7AlqvT/5MkNCtE8XM7w/r5KvJ/j4YvpPwHAvWwbxCQA9saeCfLkrz9mMEdBRhLMQ ZpOA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVuBlLc8ouhwehNIZ/q1sYsKnptRFJrnWJLqfQTXw0AhuOg8wdc Nyy6K7nPcd40Kn90nnwZwQFJ4Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx46QeiULwSF9YXUJBeu4Uz+/DiiIjBRzLt7K80QodRY6et9RqQnc1GDqISWp5JHBrSaZeJ7Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:24d1:: with SMTP id 17mr3958996wmu.104.1568993450626; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-86-49-253-183.net.upcbroadband.cz. [86.49.253.183]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h63sm3124394wmf.15.2019.09.20.08.30.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 17:30:48 +0200 From: Tomas Vondra To: Michael Paquier Cc: Kuntal Ghosh , Tom Lane , Robert Haas , Andres Freund , Thomas Munro , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: subscriptionCheck failures on nightjar Message-ID: <20190920153048.wpe27ht5lcs3zlrm@development> References: <20190213215147.cjbymfojf6xndr4t@alap3.anarazel.de> <20190813080435.GL2551@paquier.xyz> <20190826132904.3ayuw36qzl2c4ktr@development> <7361.1568738373@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190917194510.iqwyl3be62pz7l27@development> <20190918005815.GB8909@paquier.xyz> <20190918215808.yonxqgycme6pbctp@development> <20190919042305.GA21144@paquier.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190919042305.GA21144@paquier.xyz> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 01:23:05PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:58:08PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> I kinda suspect it might be just a coincidence that it fails during that >> particular test. What likely plays a role here is a checkpoint timing >> (AFAICS that's the thing removing the file). On most systems the tests >> complete before any checkpoint is triggered, hence no issue. >> >> Maybe aggressively triggering checkpoints on the running cluter from >> another session would do the trick ... > >Now that I recall, another thing I forgot to mention on this thread is >that I patched guc.c to reduce the minimum of checkpoint_timeout to >1s. But even with that change you haven't managed to reproduce the issue, right? Or am I misunderstanding? regarss -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services