Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY bug: VACUUM sets frozenxid past a xid in async queue
Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>
From: Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>
To: Daniil Davydov <3danissimo@gmail.com>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>, Alexandra Wang <alexandra.wang.oss@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-08-19T00:14:15Z
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 →
-
Clear 'xid' in dummy async notify entries written to fill up pages
- 84f1bf4afa5e 14.21 landed
- 21a9014cf00a 15.16 landed
- 0e8eaa2181d4 16.12 landed
- d80d5f099502 17.8 landed
- 82fa6b78dba1 18.2 landed
- 0bdc777e8007 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Fix remaining race condition with CLOG truncation and LISTEN/NOTIFY
- c2e58c0711fe 14.21 landed
- 0c862646cf2a 15.16 landed
- 44e8c60be66c 16.12 landed
- c2682810ab7d 17.8 landed
- 7b069a1876e4 18.2 landed
- 797e9ea6e54b 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Fix bug where we truncated CLOG that was still needed by LISTEN/NOTIFY
- eba917d360e7 14.21 landed
- 1a469d7b5b7d 15.16 landed
- 053e1868b7ee 16.12 landed
- d02c03ddc5e3 17.8 landed
- 321ec54625fd 18.2 landed
- 8eeb4a0f7c06 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Escalate ERRORs during async notify processing to FATAL
- 7cb05dd2d198 14.21 landed
- b1da37de21d4 15.16 landed
- c1a5bde003b8 16.12 landed
- b821c92920f0 17.8 landed
- aab4a84bb070 18.2 landed
- 1b4699090eaf 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Limit the size of TID lists during parallel GIN build
- c98dffcb7c70 19 (unreleased) cited
On Wed Aug 13, 2025 at 4:29 PM -03, Daniil Davydov wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 8:41 PM Matheus Alcantara > <matheusssilv97@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed Aug 6, 2025 at 7:44 AM -03, Álvaro Herrera wrote: >> >> My questions: >> >> >> >> 1. Is it acceptable to drop notifications from the async queue if >> >> there are no active listeners? There might still be notifications that >> >> haven’t been read by any previous listener. >> > >> > I'm somewhat wary of this idea -- could these inactive listeners become >> > active later and expect to be able to read their notifies? >> > >> I'm bit worry about this too. > > What exactly do we mean by "active listener"? According to the source code, > the active listener (as far as I understand) is the one who listens to at least > one channel. If we have no active listeners in the database, the new listener > will set its pointer to the tail of the async queue. Thus, messages with old > xid will not be touched by anybody. I don't see any point in dropping them > in this case. > I think that this definition is correct, but IIUC the tail can still have notifications with xid's that were already truncated by vacuum freeze. When the LISTEN is executed, we first loop through the notification queue to try to advance the queue pointers and we can eventually iterate over a notification that was added on the queue without any listener but it has a xid that is already truncated by vacuum freeze, so in this case it will fail to get the transaction status. On Alex steps to reproduce the issue it first executes the NOTIFY and then executes the LISTEN which fails after vacuum freeze. > If the "inactive" listener is the backend which is stuck somewhere, the > answer is "no" - this backend should be able to process all notifications. > I tried to reproduce the issue by using some kind of "inactive" listener but so far I didn't manage to trigger the error. This is what I tried: 1. Create listener: postgres=# listen c1; 2. Execute a very long query to make the backend busy to process the notification: postgres=# select * from generate_series(1,10000000000) g where g > 1; 3. On another session send the notification postgres=# notify c1; 4. Execute pgbench test: pgbench -n -c 80 -j 10 -t 15000 -f test.sql postgres 5. Verify that we have multiple files on pg_xact: ➜ ls -lah ~/pg-devel/data/pg_xact total 608 -rw-------@ 1 matheus staff 256K Aug 18 20:36 0000 -rw-------@ 1 matheus staff 40K Aug 18 20:56 0001 6. Execute VACUUM FREEZE on every database on the server postgres=# VACUUM FREEZE; VACUUM postgres=# \c template1 You are now connected to database "template1" as user "postgres". template1=# VACUUM FREEZE; VACUUM template1=# \c template0 You are now connected to database "template0" as user "postgres". template0=# VACUUM FREEZE; VACUUM After the vacuum freeze I still can see the same files on pg_xact/ and if I cancel the long query the notification is received correctly, and then if I execute vacuum freeze again on every database the oldest pg_xact file is truncated. So, if my tests are correct I don't think that storing the oldest xid is necessary anymore since I don't think that we can lose notifications using the patch from Daniil or I'm missing something here? Thinking about this, maybe another solution for this would be to change queue advancing pointers to skip the transaction status check? With this we would not need to touch any vacuum freeze code and instead change the LISTEN execution to handle this scenario. Thoughts? -- Matheus Alcantara