Re: BUG #18334: Segfault when running a query with parallel workers

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Marcin Barczyński <mba(dot)ogolny(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #18334: Segfault when running a query with parallel workers
Date: 2024-02-11 21:30:28
Message-ID: CA+hUKGLnoVvU4v7--m0aDLhc+TNYjyf60aL1Y=SkRFWU-2qdzw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:30 AM Marcin Barczyński <mba(dot)ogolny(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:51 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > > 2024-02-03 09:16:33.798 EST [3261686-102] app= LOG: background worker
> > > "parallel worker" (PID 2387431) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation
> > > fault
> > > 2024-02-03 09:16:33.798 EST [3261686-103] app= DETAIL: Failed process was
> > > running: set max_parallel_workers=8; set work_mem='20GB';
> >
> > It's hard to do anything with just the query. Can you put together a
> > self-contained test case, including table definitions and some sample
> > data? (The data most likely could be dummy generated data.)
>
> No, not really. This issue happens on a production machine and a large
> volume of data (terabytes) is likely the cause of the error.

Hi,

Could you please show EXPLAIN ANALYZE for the query? In gdb from that
core, can you please show "info proc mappings", and in frame 0 "print
*area", and in frame 1, "print *tuple" and "print *hashtable"?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2024-02-12 10:22:43 BUG #18337: Unable to write temp variables path
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2024-02-09 10:46:03 Re: BUG #17828: postgres_fdw leaks file descriptors on error and aborts aborted transaction in lack of fds