From: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Dmitry <dsy(dot)075(at)yandex(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server |
Date: | 2025-06-27 19:37:37 |
Message-ID: | 1411CA5F-679F-476C-B781-A9FDBFCD974A@yandex-team.ru |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 27 Jun 2025, at 11:41, Dmitry <dsy(dot)075(at)yandex(dot)ru> wrote:
>
> It seems that the hypothesis has not been confirmed.
Indeed.
For some reason your reproduction does not work for me.
I tried to create a test from your workload description. PFA patch with a very dirty prototype.
to run test you can run:
cd contrib/amcheck
PROVE_TESTS=t/006_MultiXact_standby.pl make check
To check that reproduction worked or not you can read tmp_check/log/006_MultiXact_standby_standby_1.log and see if there are messages "Timed out: nextMXact %u tmpMXact %u".
If you could codify our reproduction into this TAP test, we could make it portable. So I can debug the problem on my machine...
Either way we can proceed with remote debugging via mailing list :)
Thank you!
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Make-next-multixact-sleep-timed-with-debug-loggin.patch | application/octet-stream | 1012 bytes |
v3-0002-Test-concurrent-Multixact-reading-on-stadnby.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.5 KB |
unknown_filename | text/plain | 1 byte |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2025-06-27 21:35:50 | Re: Making Row Comparison NULL row member handling more robust during skip scans |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2025-06-27 19:33:20 | Re: Cluster.pm psql() undefined $$stderr |