From: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Race conditions with WAL sender PID lookups |
Date: | 2017-05-21 04:37:26 |
Message-ID: | e0514734ff7f44295a8f69105d5e1eb9@xs4all.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-05-20 14:40, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Also, as Horiguchi-san pointed out earlier, walreceiver seems need the
>> similar fix.
>
> Actually, now that I look at it, ready_to_display should as well be
> protected by the lock of the WAL receiver, so it is incorrectly placed
> in walreceiver.h. As you are pointing out, pg_stat_get_wal_receiver()
> is lazy as well, and that's new in 10, so we have an open item here
> for both of them. And I am the author for both things. No issues
> spotted in walreceiverfuncs.c after review.
>
> I am adding an open item so as both issues are fixed in PG10. With the
> WAL sender part, I think that this should be a group shot.
>
> So what do you think about the attached?
> [walsnd-pid-races-v3.patch]
With this patch on current master my logical replication tests
(pgbench-over-logical-replication) run without errors for the first time
in many days (even weeks).
I'll do still more and longer tests but I have gathered already a long
streak of successful runs since you posted the patch so I am getting
convinced this patch is solved the problem that I was experiencing.
Pity it didn't make the beta.
thanks,
Erik Rijkers
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-05-21 05:30:14 | Re: Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-05-21 03:43:51 | Re: bumping HASH_VERSION to 3 |