| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
| Date: | 2023-04-28 02:51:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+Qg79oR0LknxC05DvWfh_eiyh7eO3sDOiuVsu_dCUDHA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
<houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > IIUC, that assert will fail in case of any error raised between
> > ApplyWorkerMain()->logicalrep_worker_attach()->before_shmem_exit() and
> > ApplyWorkerMain()->InitializeApplyWorker()->BackgroundWorkerInitializeC
> > onnectionByOid()->InitPostgres().
>
> Thanks for reporting the issue.
>
> I think the problem is that it tried to release locks in
> logicalrep_worker_onexit() before the initialization of the process is complete
> because this callback function was registered before the init phase. So I think we
> can add a conditional statement before releasing locks. Please find an attached
> patch.
>
Alexander, does the proposed patch fix the problem you are facing?
Sawada-San, and others, do you see any better way to fix it than what
has been proposed?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Naylor | 2023-04-28 03:21:24 | Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe) |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2023-04-28 02:43:48 | Re: pg_stat_io for the startup process |