Re: There's some sort of race condition with the new FSM stuff

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, books(at)ejurka(dot)com
Subject: Re: There's some sort of race condition with the new FSM stuff
Date: 2008-10-14 12:47:16
Message-ID: 20591.1223988436@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> I still wonder, though, why we're seeing the error consistently on kudu,
> and not on any other animal. Perhaps the forknum field that's left
> uninitialized gets a different value there than on other platforms.

Hmm ... AFAICS this mistake would mean that no forknum field of the
requests[] array ever gets set at all, so they would stay at whatever
the virgin value in the shmem segment had been. Perhaps Solaris doesn't
guarantee that a shared memory block starts out as zeroes? But if
there were random garbage in the forknum fields you'd expect rather more
failures than are observed.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-10-14 12:51:06 Re: Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?
Previous Message Philip Warner 2008-10-14 11:52:24 Re: Proposed patch: make pg_dump --data-only consider FK constraints