From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Incorrect snapshots while promoting hot standby node when 2PC is used |
Date: | 2021-05-04 17:13:37 |
Message-ID: | 20210504171337.o2fathpgatalkvm2@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-05-04 12:32:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > Michael Paquier (running locally I think), and subsequently Thomas Munro
> > (noticing [1]), privately reported that they noticed an assertion failure in
> > GetSnapshotData(). Both reasonably were wondering if that's related to the
> > snapshot scalability patches.
> > Michael reported the following assertion failure in 023_pitr_prepared_xact.pl:
> >> TRAP: FailedAssertion("TransactionIdPrecedesOrEquals(TransactionXmin, RecentXmin)", File: "procarray.c", Line: 2468, PID: 22901)
>
> mantid just showed a failure that looks like the same thing, at
> least it's also in 023_pitr_prepared_xact.pl:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mantid&dt=2021-05-03%2013%3A07%3A06
>
> The assertion line number is rather different though:
>
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("TransactionIdPrecedesOrEquals(TransactionXmin, RecentXmin)", File: "procarray.c", Line: 2094, PID: 1163004)
I managed to hit that one as well and it's also what fairywren hit - the
assertion in 2094 and 2468 are basically copies of the same check, and
which one hit is a question of timing.
> and interestingly, this happened in a parallel worker:
I think the issue can be hit (or rather detected) whenever a transaction
builds one snapshot while in recovery, and a second one during
end-of-recovery. The parallel query here is just
2021-05-03 09:18:35.602 EDT [1162987:6] DETAIL: Failed process was running: SELECT pg_is_in_recovery() = 'f';
(parallel due to force_parallel_mode) - which of course is likely to run
during end-of-recovery
So it does seem like the same bug of resetting the KnownAssignedXids
stuff too early.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2021-05-04 17:35:50 | Re: PG in container w/ pid namespace is init, process exits cause restart |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-05-04 16:56:37 | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |