Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > How sure are we that this is the cause of the problem? The feeling I got > > was "this is a good guess". If so, do we want to prevent ourselves > > getting any further clues in case we're wrong? It's also an interesting > > case of a (low likelihood) bug which is not fixable on any stable branch. > > well I have a lot of trust into tom - though the main issue is that this > issue seems to be difficult hard to trigger. > afaik only one box (lionfish) ever managed to hit it and even there only > 2 times out of several hundred builds - I don't suppose we can come up > with a testcase that might be more reliably showing that issue ?
Maybe we could write a suitable test case using Martijn's concurrent testing framework. Or with a pair of custom SQL script running under pgbench, and a separate process sending random SIGSTOP/SIGCONT to backends. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
