Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
| От | Alexander Lakhin |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | f5b9938d-5931-45b2-bec9-de732e292f29@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Tom and Tomas,
01.04.2026 23:20, Tom Lane wrote:
01.04.2026 23:20, Tom Lane wrote:
Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> writes:I think this can explain slow CommitTransactionCommand() and why it happens not every time. Regarding other animals, I guess they can experience the same bumps but not exceeding 5 seconds (50 tries). Thus, from my understanding, for the failure to happen, we need to have slow storage and initialize_worker_spi() -> CommitTransactionCommand() reaching XLogFileClose().So, it remains not very clear why only widowbird is showing this failure, but I think we can safely take away the bottom-line conclusion that hard-wiring a maximum wait of 5s in CountOtherDBBackends() was not a great idea.
There also were two failures from jay: [1], [2], but yes, widowbird is
getting more and more consistent in that aspect: [3], probably because
of the storage (SD card?) degradation.
Tomas, maybe you could check if the write speed is more or less acceptable
there?
Regarding the test-specific fix, let me remind of the other failure from
widowbird: [4].
[1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=jay&dt=2026-03-10%2019%3A26%3A19
[2] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=jay&dt=2026-03-24%2020%3A43%3A24
[3] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=widowbird&br=master
[4] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=widowbird&dt=2025-10-25%2010%3A35%3A03
Best regards,
Alexander
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: