Re: v13: CLUSTER segv with wal_level=minimal and parallel index creation

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: noah(at)leadboat(dot)com
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: v13: CLUSTER segv with wal_level=minimal and parallel index creation
Date: 2020-09-08 01:43:32
Message-ID: 20200908.104332.1790214922230554649.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Tue, 08 Sep 2020 09:13:53 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> At Mon, 7 Sep 2020 02:32:55 -0700, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote in
> > As a PoC, this looks promising. Thanks. Would you add a test case such that
> > the following demonstrates the bug in the absence of your PoC?
> >
> > printf '%s\n%s\n%s\n' 'log_statement = all' 'wal_level = minimal' 'max_wal_senders = 0' >/tmp/minimal.conf
> > make check TEMP_CONFIG=/tmp/minimal.conf
>
> Mmm. I was close to add some tests to 018_wal_optimize.pl but your
> suggestion seems better. I added several ines to create_index.sql.
>
> > Please have the test try both a nailed-and-mapped relation and a "nailed, but
> > not mapped" relation. I am fairly confident that your PoC fixes the former
> > case, but the latter may need additional code.
>
> Mmm. You're right. I choosed pg_amproc_fam_proc_index as
> nailed-but-not-mapped index.

I fixed a typo (s/staring/starting/).

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-Fix-assertion-failure-during-reindex-while-wal_le.patch text/x-patch 3.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-09-08 01:45:59 Re: Evaluate expression at planning time for two more cases
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2020-09-08 01:34:00 Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2