Re: Deadlock between backend and recovery may not be detected

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
To: "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com>, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Deadlock between backend and recovery may not be detected
Date: 2020-12-16 17:15:00
Message-ID: 0bba5bf2-cd08-1038-09bd-b95350e89f0d@oss.nttdata.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020/12/16 23:28, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/16/20 2:36 PM, Victor Yegorov wrote:
>>
>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>>
>> ср, 16 дек. 2020 г. в 13:49, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com <mailto:masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>>:
>>
>> After doing this procedure, you can see the startup process and backend
>> wait for the table lock each other, i.e., deadlock. But this deadlock remains
>> even after deadlock_timeout passes.
>>
>> This seems a bug to me.
>>
> +1
>
>>
>> > * Deadlocks involving the Startup process and an ordinary backend process
>> > * will be detected by the deadlock detector within the ordinary backend.
>>
>> The cause of this issue seems that ResolveRecoveryConflictWithLock() that
>> the startup process calls when recovery conflict on lock happens doesn't
>> take care of deadlock case at all. You can see this fact by reading the above
>> source code comment for ResolveRecoveryConflictWithLock().
>>
>> To fix this issue, I think that we should enable STANDBY_DEADLOCK_TIMEOUT
>> timer in ResolveRecoveryConflictWithLock() so that the startup process can
>> send PROCSIG_RECOVERY_CONFLICT_STARTUP_DEADLOCK signal to the backend.
>> Then if PROCSIG_RECOVERY_CONFLICT_STARTUP_DEADLOCK signal arrives,
>> the backend should check whether the deadlock actually happens or not.
>> Attached is the POC patch implimenting this.
>>
> good catch!
>
> I don't see any obvious reasons why the STANDBY_DEADLOCK_TIMEOUT shouldn't be set in ResolveRecoveryConflictWithLock() too (it is already set in ResolveRecoveryConflictWithBufferPin()).
>
> So + 1 to consider this as a bug and for the way the patch proposes to fix it.

Thanks Victor and Bertrand for agreeing!
Attached is the updated version of the patch.

Regards,

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

Attachment Content-Type Size
recovery_conflict_lock_deadlock_v2.patch text/plain 8.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2020-12-16 17:22:23 Re: pg_upgrade test for binary compatibility of core data types
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2020-12-16 17:07:08 Re: SELECT INTO deprecation