Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add amcheck extension to contrib.

2017-03-14 Thread Andres Freund 
On 2017-03-13 14:09:39 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2017-03-13 15:45:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I could be wrong, but the most obvious explanation for this failure is
> > that autovacuum had a lock on the table or index when we looked.
> > Even if that isn't why axolotl failed in this particular case, I think
> > it's dead certain that we will see such failures from time to time
> > if this test script isn't tightened up.  IIUC what the test is trying
> > to look for, I think adding "AND pid = pg_backend_pid()" to this query
> > would be an appropriate fix.
> 
> Yes, that sounds reasonable.  Will do in a bit.  Thanks for noticing.

Pushed.

- Andres


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add amcheck extension to contrib.

2017-03-13 Thread Andres Freund 
Hi,

On 2017-03-13 15:45:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I could be wrong, but the most obvious explanation for this failure is
> that autovacuum had a lock on the table or index when we looked.
> Even if that isn't why axolotl failed in this particular case, I think
> it's dead certain that we will see such failures from time to time
> if this test script isn't tightened up.  IIUC what the test is trying
> to look for, I think adding "AND pid = pg_backend_pid()" to this query
> would be an appropriate fix.

Yes, that sounds reasonable.  Will do in a bit.  Thanks for noticing.

- Andres


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add amcheck extension to contrib.

2017-03-13 Thread Tom Lane 
Andres Freund  writes:
> Add amcheck extension to contrib.

axolotl just failed on this:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=axolotl=2017-03-13%2017%3A49%3A24

***
*** 78,86 
  
  -- make sure we don't have any leftover locks
  SELECT * FROM pg_locks WHERE relation IN ('bttest_a_idx'::regclass, 
'bttest_b_idx'::regclass);
!  locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid | transactionid | 
classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction | pid | mode | granted | 
fastpath 
! 
--+--+--+--+---++---+-+---+--++-+--+-+--
! (0 rows)
  
  COMMIT;
  -- cleanup
--- 78,87 
  
  -- make sure we don't have any leftover locks
  SELECT * FROM pg_locks WHERE relation IN ('bttest_a_idx'::regclass, 
'bttest_b_idx'::regclass);
!  locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid | transactionid | 
classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction |  pid  |  mode   | 
granted | fastpath 
! 
--+--+--+--+---++---+-+---+--++---+-+-+--
!  relation |57562 |57573 |  |   ||   | 
|   |  | 4/29   | 20342 | AccessShareLock | t   
| t
! (1 row)
  
  COMMIT;
  -- cleanup


I could be wrong, but the most obvious explanation for this failure is
that autovacuum had a lock on the table or index when we looked.
Even if that isn't why axolotl failed in this particular case, I think
it's dead certain that we will see such failures from time to time
if this test script isn't tightened up.  IIUC what the test is trying
to look for, I think adding "AND pid = pg_backend_pid()" to this query
would be an appropriate fix.

regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers