Re: startup process stuck in recovery

From: Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: startup process stuck in recovery
Date: 2017-10-09 23:12:45
Message-ID: 1EE3427E-2FE2-4B11-BCF7-0B001C315EFC@thebuild.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


> On Oct 9, 2017, at 14:29, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Hmm. Creating or dropping a temp table does take AccessExclusiveLock,
> just as it does for a non-temp table. In principle we'd not have to
> transmit those locks to standbys, but I doubt that the WAL code has
> enough knowledge to filter them out. So a lot of temp tables and
> a lot of separate subtransactions could be a nasty combination.

The problem indeed appear to be a very large number of subtransactions, each one creating a temp table, inside a single transaction. It's made worse by one of those transactions finally getting replayed on the secondary, only to have another one come in right behind it...
--
-- Christophe Pettus
xof(at)thebuild(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2017-10-09 23:15:58 Re: Can master and slave on different PG versions?
Previous Message David Rowley 2017-10-09 23:09:56 Re: Equivalence Classes when using IN