Re: SIGSEGV in BRIN autosummarize
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Date: 2017-10-15T17:08:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 08:56:56PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:57:32PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > > Also notice the vacuum process was interrupted, same as yesterday (think > > > goodness for full logs). Our INSERT script is using python > > > multiprocessing.pool() with "maxtasksperchild=1", which I think means we load > > > one file and then exit the subprocess, and pool() creates a new subproc, which > > > starts a new PG session and transaction. Which explains why autovacuum starts > > > processing the table only to be immediately interrupted. > > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 01:57:14AM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > I don't follow. Why does it explain that autovacuum gets canceled? I > > mean, merely opening a new connection/session should not cancel > > autovacuum. That requires a command that requires table-level lock > > conflicting with autovacuum (so e.g. explicit LOCK command, DDL, ...). > > I was thinking that INSERT would do it, but I gather you're right about > autovacuum. Let me get back to you about this.. I confirmed that we're taking an explicit lock before creating new child tables (as I recall, to avoid errors in the logs shortly after midnight when multiple subprocesses see data for the new date for the first time): 2017-10-15 12:52:50.499-04 | 59e3925e.6951 | statement: LOCK TABLE cdrs_huawei_sgsnPDPRecord IN SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE MODE Probably we can improve that with LOCK TABLE ONLY. Justin
Commits
-
Fix autovacuum work item error handling
- 52ca7572c364 10.1 landed
- be72b9c378bf 11.0 landed