From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: "ERROR: deadlock detected" when replicating TRUNCATE |
Date: | 2021-05-17 10:46:18 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-sL6Sidev-ZXti1M6vvn9xroyOipFacb1wRs-E6u5OhiA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:43 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:05 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > PSA a patch adding a test for this scenario.
> >
> > I am not sure this test case is exactly targeting the problematic
> > behavior because that will depends upon the order of execution of the
> > apply workers right?
> >
>
> Yeah, so we can't guarantee that this test will always reproduce the
> problem but OTOH, I have tried two times and it reproduced both times.
> I guess we don't have a similar test where Truncate will replicate to
> two subscriptions, otherwise, we would have caught such a problem.
> Having said that, I am fine with leaving this test if others feel so
> on the grounds that it won't always lead to the problem reported.
Although it is not guaranteed to reproduce the scenario every time, it
is testing a new scenario, so +1 for the test.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-05-17 10:53:18 | Re: Inaccurate error message when set fdw batch_size to 0 |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-05-17 10:13:05 | Re: "ERROR: deadlock detected" when replicating TRUNCATE |