Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 17:05:06 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Clean up NamedLWLockTranche stuff
Message-ID: <acb_Eo1XtmCO_9z7@nathan>
References: <acVEqGemyK-Yjswa@nathan>
 <adab98a3-a0e3-4455-9b63-ae6f1ecd18c9@iki.fi>
 <CAA5RZ0ueB84OUews-mS0+ojeWaDtcoV1qY4CNZD8PrdGcaXW-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <d78edccb-27c0-4c9c-baee-1ce7745c8cc4@iki.fi>
 <0ba6cb8c-a893-4445-b8fa-fa9f52be8f39@iki.fi>
 <CAA5RZ0s+-_d6RBSfmLvekGLTCi2EZ7hiHp3RhMVDEexGXq=7Vg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA5RZ0sLENRM+BicUjQFs_rP38oPx3gm0SsGrD0-jMhhM+HZ_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e1dd445-730e-40c9-b0f7-4d153bb013fb@iki.fi>
 <xsgt5dpoo27vezqf4a255v35sxsgtyxklwolganultoftmuzlo@vjpujzjhzmk2>
 <acb7lL5zrsieS9k3@nathan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Lz5NZmdVPmVGc+6p"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <acb7lL5zrsieS9k3@nathan>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/acb_Eo1XtmCO_9z7%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk


--Lz5NZmdVPmVGc+6p
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 04:50:12PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 05:22:33PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
>> TRAP: failed Assert("MemoryContextIsValid(context)"), File: "mcxt.c", Line: 1270, PID: 230491
>> [...](ExceptionalCondition+0x54)[0xaaaae186c204]
>> [...](MemoryContextAllocExtended+0x0)[0xaaaae18a2a24]
>> [...](RequestNamedLWLockTranche+0x6c)[0xaaaae16e7310]
>> [...](process_shmem_requests+0x28)[0xaaaae1881628]
>> [...](PostgresSingleUserMain+0xc4)[0xaaaae1701a34]
>> [...](main+0x6ac)[0xaaaae12a2adc]
>> /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xe8)[0xffff99713dd8]
>> [...](+0xf2b98)[0xaaaae12a2b98]
>> Aborted
>> pg_rewind: error: postgres single-user mode in target cluster failed
> 
> Hm.  AFAICT PostmasterContext isn't created in single-user mode, and the
> commit in question has RequestNamedLWLockTranche() allocate requests there.
> I guess the idea is to allow backends to free that memory after forking
> from postmaster, but we don't do that for the NamedLWLockTrancheRequests
> list.  Maybe we should surround the last part of that function with
> MemoryContextSwitchTo(...) to either TopMemoryContext or PostmasterContext
> depending on whether we're in single-user mode.

Concretely, like the attached.

-- 
nathan

--Lz5NZmdVPmVGc+6p
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=0001-fix-RequestNamedLWLockTranche.patch