Re: ERROR: XX000: cannot update SecondarySnapshot during a parallel operation - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: ERROR: XX000: cannot update SecondarySnapshot during a parallel operation
Date
Msg-id 11343.1552621527@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ERROR: XX000: cannot update SecondarySnapshot during a parallel operation  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> A fast way to find out would be to get one of these people who can
> reproduce the problem to recompile PostgreSQL with that error changed
> to a PANIC, and examine the resulting smoldering core.  (Someone had a
> proposal to make PostgreSQL errors optionally dump the function call
> stack with backtrace(3) even in regular production builds, which would
> make this kind of investigations go faster, I wonder what happened to
> that.)

Can't speak for other people, but I remember experimenting with
glibc's backtrace(3) and being so underwhelmed by the usefulness
of the information presented that I thought incorporating it would
be mostly a waste of effort.  Maybe there's an argument that it's
better than nothing at all; but I think we'd still be driven to
asking people to get stack traces with better tools.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: fuzk
Date:
Subject: Re:Re: ERROR: XX000: cannot update SecondarySnapshot during aparallel operation
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: LDAP authenticated session terminated by signal 11: Segmentationfault, PostgresSQL server terminates other active server processes