Re: spoonbill vs. -HEAD

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
Cc: Postgresql Hackers Mailinglist <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: spoonbill vs. -HEAD
Date: 2013-03-26 22:30:45
Message-ID: 21918.1364337045@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> hmm - will look into that in a bit - but I also just noticed that on the
> same day spoonbill broke there was also a commit to that file
> immediately before that code adding the fflush() calls.

It's hard to see how those would be related to this symptom. My bet
is that the new fk-deadlock test exposed some pre-existing issue in
isolationtester. Not quite clear what yet, though.

A different line of thought is that the cancel was received by the
backend but didn't succeed in cancelling the query for some reason.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2013-03-26 23:19:22 Re: Ignore invalid indexes in pg_dump
Previous Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2013-03-26 21:48:27 Re: spoonbill vs. -HEAD