Re: Logical replication 'invalid memory alloc request size 1585837200' after upgrading to 17.5

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Duncan Sands <duncan(dot)sands(at)deepbluecap(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Logical replication 'invalid memory alloc request size 1585837200' after upgrading to 17.5
Date: 2025-06-21 00:17:32
Message-ID: CAD21AoC+H0m1CORbV9vcnAEZ+w3ktaNPB0RWxHgGj7rKBzzKGg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 5:21 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Dear hackers,
>
> I've analyzed the issue, and this can always happen when --DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS is
> set on PG13. My suggestion is to remove the latter part of test on this branch.
>
> In the failed workload, we tested the case that one long transaction inserts a
> tuple after the concurrent transaction does ALTER PUBLICATION ADD TABLE.
> For PG14+ the change can be published, and PG13 it cannot be replicated because
> the distributed inval messages cannot be executed during the transaction. That's
> why we expected no results were output.
>
> So what if the -DDCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS is set for the workload? relsync cache
> can be discarded very frequently and backend process always read the system
> catalog when it processes their changes. This means decoder can recognize that the
> pg_publication has been updated and it can publish changes based on the altered
> publication information. This behavior is opposite from normal.
>
> To fix the test failure, I suggest to just remove the case. Insert-after-commit
> case has already been tested by above part of this file, so no need to do others.
>
> Attached file does accordingly.

Thank you for providing the patch. I'll look at the issue and the
patch in depth but it sounds like a reasonable solution.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-06-21 20:01:03 Re: BUG #18960: Mistake in test test_simple_pipeline (libpq_pipeline.c)
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2025-06-20 22:48:37 Re: BUG #18964: `ALTER DATABASE ... RESET ...` fails to reset extension parameters that no longer exist