Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689)
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689)
Дата
Msg-id
2579006.1596658748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689) Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:22 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> In the longer term, it's annoying that we have no test methodology >> for this other than "manually set a breakpoint here". If we're going >> to allow plan-relevant DDL changes to happen with less than full table >> lock, I think we need to improve that. I spent a little bit of time >> just now trying to build an isolationtester case for this, and failed >> completely. So I wonder if we can create some sort of test module that >> allows capture of a plan tree and then execution of that plan tree later >> (even after relcache inval would normally have forced replanning). >> Obviously that could not be a normal SQL-accessible feature, because >> some types of invals would make the plan completely wrong, but for >> testing purposes it'd be mighty helpful to check that a stale plan >> still works. > That's an interesting idea. I don't know exactly how it would work, > but I agree that it would allow useful testing that we can't do today. After thinking about it for a little bit, I'm envisioning a test module that can be loaded into a session, and then it gets into the planner_hook, and what it does is after each planner execution, take and release an advisory lock with some selectable ID. Then we can construct isolationtester specs that do something like session 1 session 2 LOAD test-module; SET custom_guc_for_lock_id = n; prepare test tables; SELECT pg_advisory_lock(n); SELECT victim-query-here; ... after planning, query blocks on lock perform DDL changes; SELECT pg_advisory_unlock(n); ... query executes with now-stale plan regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
От: Robert Haas
Дата: