Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY does not index prepared xact's data
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
From: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Sandeep Thakkar <sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, CM Team <cm@enterprisedb.com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Semab Tariq <semab.tariq@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2021-11-03T04:42:03Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Attachments
- step-to-crash-v0.patch (text/plain) patch v0
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 06:20:42AM +0530, Sandeep Thakkar wrote:
> (gdb) frame 1
>
> #1 0x40000000003fdc00:0 in equalTupleDescs (tupdesc1=0x60000000001f65e0,
>
> tupdesc2=0x60000000001fba08)
>
...
> (gdb) p tupdesc2->attrs[2]
>
> $6 = {attrelid = 27272, attname = {data = "b", '\000' <repeats 62 times>},
> atttypid = 19, attstattarget = -1, attlen = 64, attnum = 3, attndims = 0,
> attcacheoff = -1, atttypmod = -1, attbyval = false, attalign = 99 'c',
> attstorage = 112 'p', attcompression = 0 '\000', attnotnull = false,
> atthasdef = false, atthasmissing = false, attidentity = 0 '\000',
> attgenerated = 0 '\000', attisdropped = false, attislocal = true,
> attinhcount = 0, attcollation = 950}
That looks healthy. Since gdb isn't giving line numbers, let's single-step
from the start of the function and see if that is informative. Please apply
the attached patch, which just adds a test file. Then run "make -C
src/test/subscription check PROVE_TESTS=t/080_step_equalTupleDescs.pl" and
attach
src/test/subscription/tmp_check/log/regress_log_080_step_equalTupleDescs in a
reply to this email.
On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 12:01:08AM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> So far I didn't come up with a clear understanding how this might happen.
Agreed.
> The only idea I have:
> 1. It seems equalTupleDescs() got two valid pointers, probably with broken data.
> 2. Maybe relation->rd_rel (alloceted just before relation->rd_att) was used incorrectly?
> 3. This could happen if CLASS_TUPLE_SIZE is calculated wrong. Don't we need to MAXALIGN everything due to added sizeof(relminmxid)?
> #define CLASS_TUPLE_SIZE \
> (offsetof(FormData_pg_class,relminmxid) + sizeof(TransactionId))
See the comment at overread_tuplestruct_pg_cast for the reason why I think
that can't cause an actual malfunction. Still, there's some possibility of
this being the explanation.
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Improve contrib/amcheck's tests for CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
- b1f943d2aa7e 14.1 landed
- 7f580aa5d88a 15.0 landed
- 5a4b8a8a720c 13.5 landed
- 141cd0ef0b0b 12.9 landed
-
Fix minor memory leaks in pg_dump.
- 70bef494000e 15.0 cited
-
Avoid race in RelationBuildDesc() affecting CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
- e428699cb3be 9.6.24 landed
- db86746fd11e 10.19 landed
- 5141e471b36a 11.14 landed
- dde966efb286 14.1 landed
- 2e33b43599ad 13.5 landed
- 0869e53d3a07 12.9 landed
- fdd965d074d4 15.0 landed
-
Fix CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY for the newest prepared transactions.
- df6158139f64 11.14 landed
- 560124a37c2f 10.19 landed
- 5184932432b4 9.6.24 landed
- fe5d44a1d38f 12.9 landed
- a9d0a5409415 13.5 landed
- a5b9a0000e14 14.1 landed
- 3cd9c3b92197 15.0 landed
-
Add -w back to the flags for pg_ctl (re)start in PostgresNode
- b33259e261ae 15.0 cited
-
Fix CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY for simultaneous prepared transactions.
- 77a0e14f0b21 9.5.25 landed
- d683d6528dba 9.6.21 landed
- 179775135b41 10.16 landed
- d1ab4bf6ed2d 11.11 landed
- be843ce29737 12.6 landed
- 86a5b309c933 13.2 landed
- 8a54e12a38d1 14.0 landed