| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: pg14b1 stuck in lazy_scan_prune/heap_page_prune of pg_statistic |
| Date: | 2021-06-11 01:49:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk2g-muJ8ndNvgf9B=GsnSONRuW-0KQ9+ge-x5-NNyBmw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 5:58 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> The problem with writing a test is likely to find a way to halfway
> reliably schedule a transaction abort after pruning, but before the
> tuple-removal loop? Does anybody see a trick to do so?
I asked Alexander about using his pending stop events infrastructure
patch to test this code, back when it did the tupgone stuff rather
than loop:
https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=Tb7bAgCFt0VFA0YJ5Vd1RxJqZRc
I can't see any better way.
ISTM that it would be much more useful to focus on adding an assertion
(or maybe even a "can't happen" error) that fails when the DEAD/goto
path is reached with a tuple whose xmin wasn't aborted. If that was in
place then we would have caught the bug in
GetOldestNonRemovableTransactionId() far sooner. That might actually
catch other bugs in the future.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-06-11 01:53:18 | Re: Race condition in recovery? |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2021-06-11 01:44:40 | Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL" |