Re: Wrong return code in vacuumdb when multiple jobs are used

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Wrong return code in vacuumdb when multiple jobs are used
Date: 2019-05-04 09:15:04
Message-ID: 20190504091504.GF2174@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 10:35:23AM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> While reading vacuumdb code, I just noticed that it can return 0 if an
> error happen when -j is used, if errors happen on the last batch of
> commands.

Yes, I agree that this is wrong. GetIdleSlot() is much more careful
about that than vacuum_one_database(), so your patch looks good at
quick glance.

> This behavior exists since 9.5. Trivial patch attached. I'm not sure
> that a TAP test is required here, so I didn't add one. I'll be happy
> to do so though if needed.

You could make that reliable by getting a lock on a table using a
two-phase transaction, and your test case from upthread won't fly high
as we have no facility in PostgresNode.pm to keep around a session's
state using psql. FWIW, I am not convinced that it is a case worth
bothering, so no tests is fine.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julien Rouhaud 2019-05-04 09:22:22 Re: Wrong return code in vacuumdb when multiple jobs are used
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-05-04 08:55:43 Re: Inconsistent error message wording for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY