Re: Connections hang indefinitely while taking a gin index's LWLock buffer_content lock
x4mmm@yandex-team.ru
From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: "chjischj@163.com" <chjischj@163.com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-11-15T12:30:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi! Mail.App somehow borken my reponse with <div class="ApplePlainTextBody">, which is far beyond of my understanding of what is plain text, that's why I'll quote all my previous message here. Hope this mail client is OK. 14.11.2018, 23:13, "Andrey Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>: > Hi everyone! > > I didn't noticed this thread for too long somehow, sorry. > >> 8 нояб. 2018 г., в 6:46, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> написал(а): >> >> I don't think >> the general "there can't be any inserters at this subtree" thing works >> given that we have to couple buffer locks when moving right for other >> reasons. We call ginStepRight() within ginFinishSplit(), for reasons >> that date back to bug fix commit ac4ab97e from 2013 -- that detail is >> probably important, because it seems to be what breaks the subtree >> design (we don't delete in two phases or anything in GIN). > > ginVacuumPostingTreeLeaves() holds LockBufferForCleanup() on subtree root b. > Thus there may be no GinBtreeStack's holding pin on b at the moment. > When you ginStepRight(b) to the parent in ginFinishSplit(), you always get to the buffer from your stack. > Hence you can never have ginFinishSplit() deadlock with cleanup of subtree whose root is LockBufferForCleanup()'d. > > Is this correct or did I miss something? > > But we have a deadlock at hand, I'll think more about it. Something with locking protocol is clearly wrong. > >> 11 нояб. 2018 г., в 22:33, chenhj <chjischj@163.com> написал(а): >> >> The order of get lwlock in ginRedoDeletePage() may should be change from "dbuffer->pbuffer->lbuffer" to "lbuffer->dbuffer->pbuffer" . Is this right? > > This looks correct to me. > > Best regards, Andrey Borodin. I've reread Chen's reports and understood his findings. > When you ginStepRight(b) to the parent in ginFinishSplit(), you always get to the buffer from your stack. This statement does not hold. When you have a GinBtreeStack S, one of it's internal pages may split into new page P. If in this moment you start a multi-level delete from P and cascade split from S, P is not in S and we may deadlock. Correct solution seems to replace lock-coupling descent by usual B-tree searches for parent pages as in B-tree. I think I can compose patch for consideration. Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
Commits
-
Fix WAL format incompatibility introduced by backpatching of 52ac6cd2d0
- d1166af192ed 9.4.22 landed
- cda5f6575306 9.5.17 landed
- f8a69a68a087 9.6.13 landed
- e23d44016d51 10.8 landed
- 89f39736f484 11.3 landed
-
Fix wrong backpatching of ginRedoDeletePage() deadlock fix
- bf0e5a73be20 9.4.21 landed
-
Fix deadlock in GIN vacuum introduced by 218f51584d5
- fd83c83d0943 12.0 landed
- 2e3bd064e530 10.7 landed
- 9aa94d8536f8 11.2 landed
-
Prevent GIN deleted pages from being reclaimed too early
- 52ac6cd2d0cd 12.0 landed
- ad6ebcfcbb88 9.5.16 landed
- 1cf175c74f10 9.4.21 landed
- cd24b4eaece3 9.6.12 landed
- a0696d29551b 10.7 landed
- dd951dc34a2e 11.2 landed
-
Prevent deadlock in ginRedoDeletePage()
- c6ade7a8cd31 12.0 landed
- 19cf52e6cc33 9.4.21 landed
- f6c44e1b55c1 9.5.16 landed
- 865870374aff 10.7 landed
- 80d4d8d71d57 9.6.12 landed
- 225b5c9c480f 11.2 landed
-
Reduce page locking in GIN vacuum
- 218f51584d5a 10.0 cited
-
Fix race condition in GIN posting tree page deletion.
- ac4ab97ec05e 9.4.0 cited