Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 20:50:39 -0800
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
	Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org>,
	Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
Message-ID: <20230221045039.GA4026654@nathanxps13>
References: <CA+TgmobY5ALQE4U2q32YohLbJfze8CDBZ3rs2x2+ccAa+Pqw6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230208222554.GB546776@nathanxps13>
 <Y+Q2qCecB8zcqF9S@paquier.xyz>
 <20230209002413.GA603595@nathanxps13>
 <CA+TgmobE6rRs-tMArr733y9VucgNA5Nd9_qYgEVWjJDwHBwP-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <3907196.1675957889@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoY6xxDdZ1YJjMb27Ei7qgFcbu=__WtDX_cOd3GQ5uvxWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230209192952.jvx56yuutlxuvjjf@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <20230214174755.GA1348509@nathanxps13>
 <Y/QKT/vgQajgO/CU@paquier.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y/QKT/vgQajgO/CU@paquier.xyz>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230221045039.GA4026654%40nathanxps13>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 09:03:27AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:47:55AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Here is a new version of the stopgap/back-branch fix for restore_command.
>> This is more or less a rebased version of v4 with an added stderr message
>> as Andres suggested upthread.
> 
> So, this thread has moved around many subjects, still we did not get
> to the core of the issue which is what we should try to do to avoid
> sporadic failures like what the top of the thread is mentioning.
> 
> Perhaps beginning a new thread with a patch and a summary would be
> better at this stage?  Another thing I am wondering is if it could be
> possible to test that rather reliably.  I have been playing with a few
> scenarios like holding the system() call for a bit with hardcoded
> sleep()s, without much success.  I'll try harder on that part..  It's
> been mentioned as well that we could just move away from system() in
> the long-term.

I'm happy to create a new thread if needed, but I can't tell if there is
any interest in this stopgap/back-branch fix.  Perhaps we should just jump
straight to the long-term fix that Thomas is looking into.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com