| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vitaly Davydov <v(dot)davydov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Deadlock detector fails to activate on a hot standby replica |
| Date: | 2026-06-23 03:13:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwEykj-fTWSViwiSk=DKmb3tcE+zP_dm24+AoDZvar-HZw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 3:32 AM Vitaly Davydov <v(dot)davydov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>
> Dear Fujii Masao, All
>
> While working on porting the patch to other majors, I've found that, the code
> in RegisterPinCountWaiter() (see below) should be improved because it doesn't
> unlock the bufHdr when the error is raised, as in LockBufferForCleanup().
> I guess it works, but it keeps the locks a bit longer.
>
> RegisterPinCountWaiter v5 patch code:
> ...
> if ((buf_state & BM_PIN_COUNT_WAITER) != 0 &&
> bufHdr->wait_backend_pgprocno != MyProcNumber)
> elog(ERROR, "multiple processes attempting to wait for pincount 1");
>
> RegisterPinCountWaiter proposed changes:
> ...
> if ((buf_state & BM_PIN_COUNT_WAITER) != 0 &&
> bufHdr->wait_backend_pgprocno != MyProcNumber)
> {
> UnlockBufHdr(bufHdr);
> elog(ERROR, "multiple processes attempting to wait for pincount 1");
> }
>
> What do you think?
You're right. Thanks for pointing out that!
I've updated the patch accordingly.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v6-0001-Fix-deadlock-detector-activation-in-a-recovery-co.patch | application/octet-stream | 8.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Japin Li | 2026-06-23 03:17:31 | Re: md5_password_warnings for password auth with MD5-encrypted passwords |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2026-06-23 03:10:23 | Re: Heads Up: cirrus-ci is shutting down June 1st |