Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 8:26 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:26 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > wrote: > > > > Thanks for the verification. Unless someone has any further comments > or suggestions, I'll push this next week sometime. > Pushed but forgot to do indent which leads to

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:26 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: > > On Monday, June 26, 2023 12:18 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > Fair enough. If we could have been convinced of this then we can keep the > > required change only for HEAD. But anyway let's remove the work related to > > both commits

RE: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Monday, June 26, 2023 12:18 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 10:07 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > On 2023-06-23 14:04:15 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > OTOH, if the above theory is wrong or people are not convinced, I am > > > okay with removing all the changes in commits

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 10:07 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2023-06-23 14:04:15 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > OTOH, if the above theory is wrong or people are not convinced, I am > > okay with removing all the changes in commits 72e78d831a and > > 3ba59ccc89. > > I am not convinced. And even if

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

Hi, On 2023-06-23 14:04:15 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > OTOH, if the above theory is wrong or people are not convinced, I am > okay with removing all the changes in commits 72e78d831a and > 3ba59ccc89. I am not convinced. And even if I were, coming up with new justifications in a released

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 9:16 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:57 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > > > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that > > > likely > > > also means 3ba59ccc89

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 9:16 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:57 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that > > likely > > also means 3ba59ccc89 is not right. > > > > Indeed. I was thinking of a fix but couldn't

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

Hi, On 2023-06-22 10:00:01 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:53 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:27 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that > > > likely > > > also means 3ba59ccc89 is

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:53 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:27 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that > > likely > > also means 3ba59ccc89 is not right. > > Quite possibly. But I maintain that

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:57 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that likely > also means 3ba59ccc89 is not right. > Indeed. I was thinking of a fix but couldn't find one yet. One idea I am considering is to allow catalog table locks

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:27 PM Andres Freund wrote: > As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that likely > also means 3ba59ccc89 is not right. Quite possibly. But I maintain that ginInsertCleanup() is probably also bogus in a way that's directly relevant. Did you

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

Hi, On 2023-06-20 15:14:26 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 5:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:18 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 11:29 AM Jaime Casanova > > > wrote: > > > > I have been testing 16beta1, last commit >

RE: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 5:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 5:13 PM Amit Kapila > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:18 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 11:29 AM Jaime Casanova > > > wrote: > > > > I have been testing 16beta1, last

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 5:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:18 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 11:29 AM Jaime Casanova > > wrote: > > > I have been testing 16beta1, last commit > > > a14e75eb0b6a73821e0d66c0d407372ec8376105 > > > I just let

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:18 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 11:29 AM Jaime Casanova > wrote: > > I have been testing 16beta1, last commit > > a14e75eb0b6a73821e0d66c0d407372ec8376105 > > I just let sqlsmith do its magic before trying something else, and > > today I found

Re: Assert while autovacuum was executing

On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 11:29 AM Jaime Casanova wrote: > I have been testing 16beta1, last commit > a14e75eb0b6a73821e0d66c0d407372ec8376105 > I just let sqlsmith do its magic before trying something else, and > today I found a core with the attached backtrace. The assertion that fails is the

Assert while autovacuum was executing

Hi, I have been testing 16beta1, last commit a14e75eb0b6a73821e0d66c0d407372ec8376105 I just let sqlsmith do its magic before trying something else, and today I found a core with the attached backtrace. Only information on the log was this: DETAIL: Failed process was running: autovacuum: