Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly
Date: 2018-02-27 22:14:04
Message-ID: 29147.1519769644@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> (2018/02/11 6:24), Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, jaguarundi still shows a problem:
>> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=jaguarundi&dt=2018-02-10%2008%3A41%3A32

> I ran the postgres_fdw regression test with no sleep two times in a
> CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS-enabled build, and then the regression test with
> the sleep (60 seconds) two times, but I couldn't reproduce that in both
> cases. I suspect the changes in the order of the RETURNING output there
> was still caused by autovacuum kicking in partway through the run. So
> to make the regression test more stable against autovacuum, I'd propose
> to modify the regression test to disable autovacuum for the remote table
> (ie "S 1"."T 1") (and perform VACUUM ANALYZE to that table manually
> instead) in hopes of getting that fixed. Attached is a patch for that.
> I think changes added by the previous patch wouldn't make sense
> anymore, so I removed those changes.

Ping? We're still seeing those failures on jaguarundi.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2018-02-27 22:32:41 Re: Reopen logfile on SIGHUP
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-02-27 22:07:28 Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11