| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Odd, intermittent failure in contrib/pageinspect |
| Date: | 2021-01-18 22:40:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20210118224005.GA3146@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Jan-18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right. If that's the explanation, then adding DISABLE_PAGE_SKIPPING
> to the test's VACUUM options should fix it. However, to believe that
> theory you have to have some reason to think that some other process
> might have the page pinned. What would that be? test1 only has one
> small tuple in it, so it doesn't seem credible that autovacuum or
> autoanalyze would have fired on it.
I guess the machine would have to be pretty constrained. (It takes
almost seven minutes to go through the pg_upgrade test, so it does seems
small.)
> [ thinks for a bit... ] Does the checkpointer pin pages it's writing
> out? I guess it'd have to ...
It does, per SyncOneBuffer(), called from BufferSync(), called from
CheckPointBuffers().
--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-18 22:42:10 | Re: search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-18 22:35:00 | Re: Odd, intermittent failure in contrib/pageinspect |