pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedv12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ...
4+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
Commits from this thread:
2019-10-29 d80be6f2f6 eae1ba65fa Fix handling of pg_class.relispartition at swap phase in REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
* v12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ...
@ 2019-10-15 16:40 Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2019-10-15 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; +Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>; Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
On a badly-overloaded VM, we hit the previously-reported segfault in progress
reporting. This left around some *ccold indices. I tried to drop them but:
sentinel=# DROP INDEX child.alarms_null_alarm_id_idx1_ccold; -- child.alarms_null_alarm_time_idx_ccold; -- alarms_null_alarm_id_idx_ccold;
ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation 41351896
Those are children of relkind=I index on relkind=p table.
postgres=# CREATE TABLE t(i int)PARTITION BY RANGE(i);
postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 PARTITION OF t FOR VALUES FROM (1)TO(100);
postgres=# INSERT INTO t1 SELECT 1 FROM generate_series(1,99999);
postgres=# CREATE INDEX ON t(i);
postgres=# begin; SELECT * FROM t; -- DO THIS IN ANOTHER SESSION
postgres=# REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY t1_i_idx; -- cancel this one
^CCancel request sent
ERROR: canceling statement due to user request
postgres=# \d t1
...
"t1_i_idx" btree (i)
"t1_i_idx_ccold" btree (i) INVALID
postgres=# SELECT inhrelid::regclass FROM pg_inherits WHERE inhparent='t_i_idx'::regclass;
inhrelid
t1_i_idx
(1 row)
Not only can't I DROP the _ccold indexes, but also dropping the table doesn't
cause them to be dropped, and then I can't even slash dee them anymore:
jtp=# DROP INDEX t1_i_idx_ccold;
ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation 290818869
jtp=# DROP TABLE t; -- does not fail, but ..
jtp=# \d t1_i_idx_ccold
ERROR: cache lookup failed for relation 290818865
jtp=# SELECT indrelid::regclass, * FROM pg_index WHERE indexrelid='t1_i_idx_ccold'::regclass;
indrelid | 290818865
indexrelid | 290818869
indrelid | 290818865
[...]
Justin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: v12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ...
@ 2019-10-24 04:59 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
parent: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Paquier @ 2019-10-24 04:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 11:40:47AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Not only can't I DROP the _ccold indexes, but also dropping the table doesn't
> cause them to be dropped, and then I can't even slash dee them anymore:
Yes, I can confirm the report. In the case of this scenario the
reindex is waiting for the first transaction to finish before step 5,
the cancellation causing the follow-up process to not be done
(set_dead & the next ones). So at this stage the swap has actually
happened. I am still analyzing the report in depths, but you don't
have any problems with a plain index when interrupting at this stage,
and the old index can be cleanly dropped with the new one present, so
my first thoughts are that we are just missing some more dependency
cleanup at the swap phase when dealing with a partition index.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: v12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ...
@ 2019-10-28 07:14 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
parent: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Paquier @ 2019-10-28 07:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:59:29PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yes, I can confirm the report. In the case of this scenario the
> reindex is waiting for the first transaction to finish before step 5,
> the cancellation causing the follow-up process to not be done
> (set_dead & the next ones). So at this stage the swap has actually
> happened. I am still analyzing the report in depths, but you don't
> have any problems with a plain index when interrupting at this stage,
> and the old index can be cleanly dropped with the new one present, so
> my first thoughts are that we are just missing some more dependency
> cleanup at the swap phase when dealing with a partition index.
Okay, I have found this one. The issue is that at the swap phase
pg_class.relispartition of the new index is updated to use the value
of the old index (true for a partition index), however relispartition
needs to be updated as well for the old index or when trying to
interact with it we get failures as the old index is part of no
inheritance trees. We could use just use false as the index created
concurrently is not attached to a partition with its inheritance links
updated until the swap phase, but it feels more natural to just swap
relispartition for the old and the new index, as per the attached.
This brings also the point that you could just update pg_class to fix
things if you have a broken cluster.
In short, the attached fixes the issue for me, and that's the last bug
I know of in what has been reported..
--
Michael
Attachments:
reindex-conc-relispartition.patch (text/x-diff, 1.1K) download
diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/index.c b/src/backend/catalog/index.c
index 78896da391..f6c31ccd76 100644
--- a/src/backend/catalog/index.c
+++ b/src/backend/catalog/index.c
@@ -1462,6 +1462,7 @@ index_concurrently_swap(Oid newIndexId, Oid oldIndexId, const char *oldName)
newIndexTuple;
Form_pg_index oldIndexForm,
newIndexForm;
+ bool isPartition;
Oid indexConstraintOid;
List *constraintOids = NIL;
ListCell *lc;
@@ -1491,8 +1492,10 @@ index_concurrently_swap(Oid newIndexId, Oid oldIndexId, const char *oldName)
namestrcpy(&newClassForm->relname, NameStr(oldClassForm->relname));
namestrcpy(&oldClassForm->relname, oldName);
- /* Copy partition flag to track inheritance properly */
+ /* Swap the partition flags to track inheritance properly */
+ isPartition = newClassForm->relispartition;
newClassForm->relispartition = oldClassForm->relispartition;
+ oldClassForm->relispartition = isPartition;
CatalogTupleUpdate(pg_class, &oldClassTuple->t_self, oldClassTuple);
CatalogTupleUpdate(pg_class, &newClassTuple->t_self, newClassTuple);
* Re: v12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ...
@ 2019-10-29 02:20 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
parent: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Paquier @ 2019-10-29 02:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>; Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:14:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This brings also the point that you could just update pg_class to fix
> things if you have a broken cluster.
>
> In short, the attached fixes the issue for me, and that's the last bug
> I know of in what has been reported..
This one is now done. Justin has also confirmed me offline that it
fixed his problems.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-10-29 02:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-10-15 16:40 v12.0: interrupt reindex CONCURRENTLY: ccold: ERROR: could not find tuple for parent of relation ... Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
2019-10-24 04:59 ` Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
2019-10-28 07:14 ` Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
2019-10-29 02:20 ` Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
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