Re: backends stuck in "startup"

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: backends stuck in "startup"
Date: 2017-11-25 22:45:59
Message-ID: 5668.1511649959@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> writes:
> We never had any issue during the ~2 years running PG96 on this VM, until
> upgrading Monday to PG10.1, and we've now hit it 5+ times.

> BTW this is a VM run on a hypervisor managed by our customer:
> DMI: VMware, Inc. VMware Virtual Platform/440BX Desktop Reference Platform, BIOS 6.00 06/22/2012

> Linux TS-DB 2.6.32-431.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Nov 22 03:15:09 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Actually ... I was focusing on the wrong part of that. It's not
your hypervisor, it's your kernel. Running four-year-old kernels
is seldom a great idea, and in this case, the one you're using
contains the well-reported missed-futex-wakeups bug:

https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=8371

While rebuilding PG so it doesn't use POSIX semaphores will dodge
that bug, I think a kernel update would be a far better idea.
There are lots of other known bugs in that version.

Relevant to our discussion, the fix involves inserting a memory
barrier into the kernel's futex call handling:

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/76835b0ebf8a7fe85beb03c75121419a7dec52f0

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John R Pierce 2017-11-25 23:15:03 Re: Roles and security
Previous Message nikhil raj 2017-11-25 20:13:22 A particular database to move to other drive