| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query |
| Date: | 2018-02-23 02:29:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1L3RjfB3gnvhP40i0T-V9UPkz3Y8SF-t7cV5eD4MXivXg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:35 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Thomas Munro
>> PS I noticed that for BecomeLockGroupMember() we say "If we can't
>> join the lock group, the leader has gone away, so just exit quietly"
>> but for various other similar things we spew errors (most commonly
>> seen one being "ERROR: could not map dynamic shared memory segment").
>> Intentional?
>
> I suppose I thought that if we failed to map the dynamic shared memory
> segment, it might be down to any one of several causes; whereas if we
> fail to join the lock group, it must be because the leader has already
> exited. There might be a flaw in that thinking, though.
>
By the way, in which case leader can exit early? As of now, we do
wait for workers to end both before the query is finished or in error
cases.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-02-23 02:32:40 | Re: FOR EACH ROW triggers on partitioned tables |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-02-23 02:26:31 | Re: [bug fix] Cascaded standby cannot start after a clean shutdown |