Обсуждение: [HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space in HEAD

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка

[HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space in HEAD

От
Tom Lane
Дата:
logfile from a standby server:

2017-06-12 11:43:46.450 EDT [13605] LOG:  started streaming WAL from primary at 3/E6000000 on timeline 1
2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] FATAL:  could not extend file "base/47578/54806": No space left on device
2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] HINT:  Check free disk space.
2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] CONTEXT:  WAL redo at 8/EC7E0CF8 for XLOG/FPI:
2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] WARNING:  buffer refcount leak: [1243] (rel=base/47578/54806, blockNum=5249,
flags=0x8a000000,refcount=1 1) 
TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(RefCountErrors == 0)", File: "bufmgr.c", Line: 2523)
2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  startup process (PID 11261) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  terminating any other active server processes
2017-06-12 11:47:47.584 EDT [11259] LOG:  database system is shut down

The FATAL is fine, but we shouldn't have that WARNING I think, and
certainly not the assertion failure.
        regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space in HEAD

От
Robert Haas
Дата:
(On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> logfile from a standby server:
>
> 2017-06-12 11:43:46.450 EDT [13605] LOG:  started streaming WAL from primary at 3/E6000000 on timeline 1
> 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] FATAL:  could not extend file "base/47578/54806": No space left on device
> 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] HINT:  Check free disk space.
> 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] CONTEXT:  WAL redo at 8/EC7E0CF8 for XLOG/FPI:
> 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] WARNING:  buffer refcount leak: [1243] (rel=base/47578/54806, blockNum=5249,
flags=0x8a000000,refcount=1 1)
 
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(RefCountErrors == 0)", File: "bufmgr.c", Line: 2523)
> 2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  startup process (PID 11261) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
> 2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  terminating any other active server processes
> 2017-06-12 11:47:47.584 EDT [11259] LOG:  database system is shut down
>
> The FATAL is fine, but we shouldn't have that WARNING I think, and
> certainly not the assertion failure.

Commit 4b4b680c3d6d8485155d4d4bf0a92d3a874b7a65 (Make backend local
tracking of buffer pins memory efficient., vintage 2014) seems like a
likely culprit here, but I haven't tested.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space inHEAD

От
Andres Freund
Дата:
On 2017-06-12 15:12:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> (On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > logfile from a standby server:
> >
> > 2017-06-12 11:43:46.450 EDT [13605] LOG:  started streaming WAL from primary at 3/E6000000 on timeline 1
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] FATAL:  could not extend file "base/47578/54806": No space left on device
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] HINT:  Check free disk space.
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] CONTEXT:  WAL redo at 8/EC7E0CF8 for XLOG/FPI:
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:46.992 EDT [11261] WARNING:  buffer refcount leak: [1243] (rel=base/47578/54806, blockNum=5249,
flags=0x8a000000,refcount=1 1)
 
> > TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(RefCountErrors == 0)", File: "bufmgr.c", Line: 2523)
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  startup process (PID 11261) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:47.567 EDT [11259] LOG:  terminating any other active server processes
> > 2017-06-12 11:47:47.584 EDT [11259] LOG:  database system is shut down
> >
> > The FATAL is fine, but we shouldn't have that WARNING I think, and
> > certainly not the assertion failure.

Just for clarification: It's a WARNING so we print all missed leaks,
rather than erroring/asserting at the first leak.  We've for a long
while Asserted there's not a single pin failure (in earlier releases we
asserted out at the first leak).


> Commit 4b4b680c3d6d8485155d4d4bf0a92d3a874b7a65 (Make backend local
> tracking of buffer pins memory efficient., vintage 2014) seems like a
> likely culprit here, but I haven't tested.

I'm not that sure. As written above, the Assert isn't new, and given
this hasn't been reported before, I'm a bit doubtful that it's a general
refcount tracking bug.  The FPI code has been whacked around more
heavily, so it could well be a bug in it somewhere.

- Andres

Re: [HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space in HEAD

От
Michael Paquier
Дата:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2017-06-12 15:12:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Commit 4b4b680c3d6d8485155d4d4bf0a92d3a874b7a65 (Make backend local
>> tracking of buffer pins memory efficient., vintage 2014) seems like a
>> likely culprit here, but I haven't tested.
>
> I'm not that sure. As written above, the Assert isn't new, and given
> this hasn't been reported before, I'm a bit doubtful that it's a general
> refcount tracking bug.  The FPI code has been whacked around more
> heavily, so it could well be a bug in it somewhere.

Something doing a bisect could just use a VM that puts the standby on
a tiny partition. I remember seeing this assertion failure some time
ago on a test deployment, and that was really surprising. I think that
this may be hiding something, so we should really try to investigate
more what's wrong here.
-- 
Michael

Re: [HACKERS] standby server crashes hard on out-of-disk-space in HEAD

От
Michael Paquier
Дата:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> On 2017-06-12 15:12:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Commit 4b4b680c3d6d8485155d4d4bf0a92d3a874b7a65 (Make backend local
>>> tracking of buffer pins memory efficient., vintage 2014) seems like a
>>> likely culprit here, but I haven't tested.
>>
>> I'm not that sure. As written above, the Assert isn't new, and given
>> this hasn't been reported before, I'm a bit doubtful that it's a general
>> refcount tracking bug.  The FPI code has been whacked around more
>> heavily, so it could well be a bug in it somewhere.
>
> Something doing a bisect could just use a VM that puts the standby on
> a tiny partition. I remember seeing this assertion failure some time
> ago on a test deployment, and that was really surprising. I think that
> this may be hiding something, so we should really try to investigate
> more what's wrong here.

I have been playing a bit with the builds and the attached script
triggering out-of-space errors on a standby (adapt to your
environment), and while looking for a good commit, I have found that
this thing is a bit older than the 2014 vintage... Down to the
merge-base of REL9_4_STABLE and REL9_3_STABLE, the assertion failure
is still the same.

The failure is older than even 9.2, for example by testing at the
merge-base of 9.2 and 9.3:
CONTEXT:  xlog redo insert(init): rel 1663/16384/16385; tid 181441/1
TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(PrivateRefCount[i] == 0)", File: "bufmgr.c",
Line: 1788)
But well this assertion got changed in dcafdbcd.
-- 
Michael

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