Re: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
To: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: 'Katsuragi Yuta' <katsuragiy(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, 'vignesh C' <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, 'Ted Yu' <yuzhihong(at)gmail(dot)com>, 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, 'Önder Kalacı' <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com'" <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, 'Kyotaro Horiguchi' <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, 'Shubham Khanna' <khannashubham1197(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure
Date: 2024-07-26 18:10:41
Message-ID: fd8f6186-9e1e-4b9a-92c5-e71e3697d381@oss.nttdata.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2024/07/26 22:44, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2024/07/26 17:07, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
>> Dear Fujii-san,
>>
>> Just in case - based on the agreement in [1], I updated patches to keep them
>> consistent. We can use same pictures for further discussions...
>
> Thanks for updating the patches! I pushed them.

The buildfarm member "hake" reported a failure in the postgres_fdw regression test.

diff -U3 /export/home/elmer/c15x/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/contrib/postgres_fdw/expected/postgres_fdw.out /export/home/elmer/c15x/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/contrib/postgres_fdw/results/postgres_fdw.out
--- /export/home/elmer/c15x/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/contrib/postgres_fdw/expected/postgres_fdw.out Fri Jul 26 19:16:29 2024
+++ /export/home/elmer/c15x/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/contrib/postgres_fdw/results/postgres_fdw.out Fri Jul 26 19:31:12 2024
@@ -12326,7 +12326,7 @@
FROM postgres_fdw_get_connections(true);
case
------
- 1
+ 0
(1 row)

-- Clean up

The regression.diffs shows that pgfdw_conn_check returned 0 even though pgfdw_conn_checkable()
returned true. This can happen if the "revents" from poll() indicates something other than
POLLRDHUP. I think that "revents" could indicate POLLHUP, POLLERR, or POLLNVAL. Therefore,
IMO pgfdw_conn_check() should be updated as follows. I will test this change.

- return (input_fd.revents & POLLRDHUP) ? 1 : 0;
+ return (input_fd.revents &
+ (POLLRDHUP | POLLHUP | POLLERR | POLLNVAL)) ? 1 : 0;

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2024-07-26 18:29:49 Re: tls 1.3: sending multiple tickets
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2024-07-26 18:02:22 Re: Parallel heap vacuum