Re: Logical WAL sender unresponsive during decoding commit

On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 2:32 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 2:31 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 10:56 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 2:08 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 9:28 AM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi hackers!
> > > > >
> > > > > Some time ago I've seen a hanging logical replication that was trying to send transaction commit after doing table pg_repack.
> > > > > I understand that those things do not mix well. Yet walsender was ignoring pg_terminate_backend() and I think this worth fixing.
> > > > > Can we add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(); somewhere in this backtrace?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think if we want to do this in this code path then it may be it is
> > > > better to add it in ReorderBufferProcessTXN where we are looping to
> > > > process each change.
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > The same issue is recently reported[1] on -bugs and I proposed the
> > > patch that adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() to the loop in
> > > ReorderBufferProcessTXN(). I think it should be backpatched.
> > >
> >
> > I agree that it is better to backpatch this as well. Would you like to
> > verify if your patch works for all branches or if it need some tweaks?
> >
>
> Yes, I've confirmed v10 and master but will do that for other branches
> and send patches for all supported branches.
>

I've attached patches for all supported branches.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/