On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: > Ok, the problem was a little bit more trivial than I thought. > > The issue is that under a low rate there may be no transaction in progress, > however the wait procedure was relying on select's timeout. If nothing is > active there is nothing to wait for, thus it was an active loop in this > case... > > I've introduced a usleep call in place of select for this particular case. > Hopefully this is portable. > > ISTM that this bug exists since rate was introduced, so shame on me and > back-patching should be needed.
I took a look at this and found that the proposed patch applies cleanly all the way back to 9.5, but the regression is reported to have begun with a commit that starts in v10. I haven't probed into this in any depth, but are we sure that 12788ae49e1933f463bc59a6efe46c4a01701b76 is in fact where this problem originated? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
