Re: Deadlock in multiple CIC.

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeremy Finzel <finzelj(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Deadlock in multiple CIC.
Date: 2018-01-03 14:28:02
Message-ID: 20180103142802.22hisip5seu7dorg@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-12-26 13:31:03 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > It's strange that this has gone undetected for so long. I wonder if
> > there's an interaction with logical decoding and its historical
> > snapshot stuff here.
>
> I can't see how - did you have a vague theory you could share?

Not really. I was just looking at the snapmgr.c code and thinking
whether there was a chance that it was the historic snapshot could be
involved in waits. But then, as presented the failure does not use
logical decoding, so even if there's a bug there (for which I have no
evidence) it would have to be a separate one.

More generally I was wondering if there was anyplace else that would
keep a catalog snapshot registered for a long time and then go to sleep.
Looked for it desultorily, came up with nothing.

Thanks,

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2018-01-03 14:36:51 Re: Do we really need to switch to per-tuple memory context in ATRewriteTable() when Table Rewrite is not happening
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-01-03 13:55:35 Re: Do we really need to switch to per-tuple memory context in ATRewriteTable() when Table Rewrite is not happening