Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
Date: 2018-01-25 00:39:51
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Haribabu Kommi
> <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Thanks for explaining the problem in generating an isolation test to
>> test the serialize parallel query.
>> Committer can decide whether existing test is fine to part of the test suite
>> or remove it, other than that everything is fine. so I am moving the patch
>> into "ready for committer" state.
> Thank you! I will try to find a good benchmark that will really
> exercise parallel query + SSI.

This started crashing some time yesterday with an assertion failure in
the isolation tests after commit 2badb5af landed. Reordering of code
in parallel.c confused patch's fuzz heuristics leading
SetSerializableXact() to be called too soon. Here's a fix for that.

Thomas Munro

Attachment Content-Type Size
ssi-parallel-v10.patch application/octet-stream 20.1 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-01-25 00:48:22 Re: copy.c allocation constant
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-01-25 00:29:09 Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures