Re: hash_xlog_split_allocate_page: failed to acquire cleanup lock

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: hash_xlog_split_allocate_page: failed to acquire cleanup lock
Date: 2022-10-17 20:30:02
Message-ID: 20221017203002.tny6bu6yqwz545sn@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2022-10-17 13:34:02 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't feel quite as confident that not attempting a cleanup lock on
> the new bucket's primary page is OK. I think it should be fine. The
> existing comment even says it should be fine. But, that comment could
> be wrong, and I'm not sure that I have my head around what all of the
> possible interactions around that cleanup lock are. So changing it
> makes me a little nervous.

If it's not OK, then the acquire-cleanuplock-after-reinit would be an
active bug though, right?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2022-10-17 20:47:37 Re: pg_upgrade test failure
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2022-10-17 20:09:21 Re: pub/sub - specifying optional parameters without values.