From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6
Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 11:08:43 -0400
Message-ID: <26300.1556809723@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190502145045.mdrxilmm5bhq55ti@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20190430182741.s6o7mo5ebmgxxi5x@alap3.anarazel.de>
<16277.1556649660@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430190308.kga2z5oz7vab7w22@alap3.anarazel.de>
<17996.1556651503@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430221045.6slpi2vm2noda5jb@alap3.anarazel.de>
<28313.1556663080@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<28926.1556664156@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430225307.lvfvcf2776iywhw4@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20190501013638.7u7fwr4zktbyyng5@alap3.anarazel.de>
<8749.1556685814@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190502145045.mdrxilmm5bhq55ti@alap3.anarazel.de>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-05-01 00:43:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... What it's really currently doing at the
>> moment of the deadlock is cleaning out its temporary schema after the
>> client disconnected.
> I'm inclined to remove the tests from the backbranches, once we've
> committed a fix for the actual REINDEX issue, and most of the farm has
> been through a cycle or three. I don't think we'll figure out how to
> make them robust in time for next week's release.
Yeah, as I just said in my other message, I see no other alternative for
next week's releases. We can leave the test in place in HEAD a bit
longer, but I don't really want it there for the beta either, unless we
can think of some better plan.
> I don't think we can really rely on the post-disconnect phase completing
> in a particularly deterministic time.
Exactly :-(
>> Another fairly interesting thing is that this log includes the telltale
>> 2019-05-01 05:24:48.887 CEST [97694:7] pg_regress/reindex_catalog CONTEXT: while checking uniqueness of tuple (12,71) in relation "pg_class"
>> Why did I have to dig to find that information in HEAD? Have we lost
>> some useful context reporting? (Note this run is in the v10 branch.)
FWIW, as best I can reconstruct the sequence of events, I might just
not've looked. I got an error and just assumed it was the same as what
we'd seen in the buildfarm; but now we realize that there were multiple
ways to get deadlocks, and only some of them would have shown this.
For the moment I'm willing to assume this isn't a real issue.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6
In-Reply-To: <26300.1556809723@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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