Re: "tuple concurrently updated" in pg_restore --jobs
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: David Gilman <davidgilman1@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2020-07-10T21:45:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 05:36:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 04:54:40PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> This works about 99% of the time, in fact. It falls down in the --clean > > > Note that this fails for me (sometimes) even without --clean. > > Oh, I was thinking that REVOKE would only be issued in the --clean > case, but apparently that's not so. Doesn't really affect the fix > proposal though. I just finished a patch for HEAD, as attached. > > (I flushed the "CatalogId objCatId" argument of dumpACL, which was > not used.) > > I'm not sure how far to back-patch it -- I think the parallel restore > of ACLs behavior is not very old, but we might want to teach older > pg_dump versions to insert the extra dependency anyway, for safety. Yes, and the test case in David's patch on other thread [0] can't be backpatched further than this patch is. A variant on his test case could just as well be included in this patch (with pg_dump writing to a seekable FD) and then amended later to also test writing to an unseekable FD. [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/28/2568/
Commits
-
Avoid trying to restore table ACLs and per-column ACLs in parallel.
- db820b9a9d00 9.5.23 landed
- 303322c5a4a8 9.6.19 landed
- 2d43c3057c97 10.14 landed
- ea9125304dc6 14.0 landed
- bc9aaac1a188 13.0 landed
- 5fea14f4b2c5 12.4 landed
- 4fdc559c88eb 11.9 landed