Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test

From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test
Date: 2024-04-29 05:30:00
Message-ID: cbf0156f-5aa1-91db-5802-82435dda03e6@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello Tom and Michael,

29.04.2024 08:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
>> If you grep the source tree, you'd notice that a prepared transaction
>> named gxid only exists in the 2PC tests of ECPG, in
>> src/interfaces/ecpg/test/sql/twophase.pgc. So the origin of the
>> failure comes from a race condition due to test parallelization,
>> because the scan of pg_prepared_xacts affects all databases with
>> installcheck, and in your case it means that the scan of
>> pg_prepared_xacts was running in parallel of the ECPG tests with an
>> installcheck.
> Up to now, we've only worried about whether tests running in parallel
> within a single test suite can interact. It's quite scary to think
> that the meson setup has expanded the possibility of interactions
> to our entire source tree. Maybe that was a bad idea and we should
> fix the meson infrastructure to not do that. I fear that otherwise,
> we'll get bit regularly by very-low-probability bugs of this kind.

Yes, I'm afraid of the same. For example, the test failure [1] is of that
ilk, I guess.

[1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=rorqual&dt=2024-04-17%2016%3A33%3A23

Best regards,
Alexander

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2024-04-29 05:32:40 Re: A failure in prepared_xacts test
Previous Message Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) 2024-04-29 05:27:13 RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby