From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Mark pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup as parallel-restricted. |
Date: | 2017-03-06 19:41:58 |
Message-ID: | 3542dfbd-68dd-f246-8fb5-d2ac25d947fc@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On 3/6/17 12:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Mark pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup as parallel-restricted.
>
> They depend on backend-private state that will not be synchronized by
> the parallel machinery, so they should not be marked parallel-safe.
> This issue also exists in 9.6, but we obviously can't do anything
> about 9.6 clusters that already exist. Possibly this could be
> back-patched so that future 9.6 clusters would come out OK, or
> possibly we should back-patch some other fix, but that would need more
> discussion.
I think it would be worth back-patching the catalog fix for future 9.6
clusters as a start. Parallelism is off by default in 9.6 so that
mitigates some of the problem.
I don't have any regression tests that cover backups when parallelism is
enabled in 9.6, but I'm willing to do that and see if this is a
realistic issue or not.
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-06 20:23:28 | Re: pgsql: Mark pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup as parallel-restricted. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-06 18:44:36 | Re: pgsql: Notify bgworker registrant after freeing worker slot. |