Horton

Re: A assert failure when initdb with track_commit_timestamp=on

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>, Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>, "'Michael Paquier'" <michael@paquier.xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-07-04T17:17:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Disable commit timestamps during bootstrap

Attachments

Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
> On 2025/07/05 0:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As I remarked in the other thread, I don't like inventing a different
>> solution for each GUC.  So if there are even two that need something
>> done, I think Hayato-san's idea has merit.

> This code seems to assume that the processing mode is switched to bootstrap before
> GUC parameters are processed. But is that actually the case?

Oh, good point.  But there doesn't seem to be any ill effect from
making BootstrapModeMain set BootstrapProcessing a bit earlier.
Attached is a proof-of-concept that I've actually tested.

However, what I find with this POC is that

initdb -c transaction_timeout=10s

goes through fine, but (at least on my machine)

initdb -c transaction_timeout=1

yields

...
running bootstrap script ... ok
performing post-bootstrap initialization ... 2025-07-04 13:08:04.225 EDT [261836] FATAL:  terminating connection due to transaction timeout
child process exited with exit code 1

because 1ms is not enough time to complete the post-bootstrap run.
I would argue that that's pilot error and we did exactly what the
user demanded, but is there anyone who wants to say that we should
suppress such GUCs during post-bootstrap too?

			regards, tom lane