Re: There's some sort of race condition with the new FSM stuff

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, books(at)ejurka(dot)com
Subject: Re: There's some sort of race condition with the new FSM stuff
Date: 2008-10-14 20:52:54
Message-ID: 14994.1224017574@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> The bug only affected fsync/forget requests that are forwarded from
> backends, not the ones that bgwriter puts into the hash table itself.

Oh, of course. So the actual sequence of events was:

* bgwriter queues an fsync request for a FSM fork, after
writing a dirty FSM buffer.
* backend drops table, sends forget request for FSM fork,
which the bug converts into an extra forget for the main fork.
* at checkpoint, we got trouble.

> I noted that kudu has a small shared_buffers setting, 5.6 MB, compared to
> most buildfarm members, which might explain different behavior wrt.
> which buffers are written by backends and which are written by bgwriter.

Yup, that must have been the determining factor. That would also
explain a certain amount of nondeterminism in the bug's manifestation,
which also squares with the buildfarm observations.

Okay, I feel better now.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2008-10-14 21:00:59 Re: spoonbill is failing citext test
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-10-14 20:42:03 Re: spoonbill is failing citext test