Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication - Mailing list pgsql-bugs
From | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Subject | Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20191119232849.qhtuhq4udrqrz4he@alap3.anarazel.de Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Responses |
Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication
Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logicalreplication |
List | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, (Alvaro, see multixact point below) Are there any partitions? On 2019-11-19 23:17:32 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Yep. thanks for this data. This seems to confirm Andres' suspicion that > the change is actually a delete. It's not clear to me why we're doing > this toast thing for DELETEs unconditionally. Well, there never should be any toast activity in case of deletions. So there's already is something wrong in that case. I don't think just ignoring that something is wrong would be good - but raising an error would make sense. > For the record, the change LSN is 25EE/D6DE33B0 and the transactions is > between 25EE/D66F0438 and 25EE/D6DE6F00. > > 2514:rmgr: Transaction len (rec/tot): 38/ 38, tx: 0, lsn: 25EE/D66F0438, prev 25EE/D66F0410, desc: ASSIGNMENTxtop 1667601527: subxacts: 1667601528 So there's subtransactions in this workload... > > 2518:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 2063/ 2063, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F11E8, prev 25EE/D66F0CB0, desc: INSERToff 4, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964795 blk 3125 > > 2520:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 64/ 64, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F1A38, prev 25EE/D66F19F8, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 256, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964797 blk 15840 > > 2522:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 1341/ 9385, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F2118, prev 25EE/D66F1A78, desc: INSERToff 7, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964795 blk 3139 FPW > > 2524:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 64/ 64, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F54C8, prev 25EE/D66F45E0, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 257, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964797 blk 15840 > > 2525:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 1671/ 1671, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F5508, prev 25EE/D66F54C8, desc: INSERToff 2, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964792 blk 18475 > > 2527:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 64/ 64, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F6738, prev 25EE/D66F5B90, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 140, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964798 blk 2058 > > 2530:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 96/ 96, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F7E40, prev 25EE/D66F7E10, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 28, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964799 blk 5076 > > 2531:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 80/ 80, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F7EA0, prev 25EE/D66F7E40, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 88, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964800 blk 3412 > > 2532:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 54/ 54, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F7EF0, prev 25EE/D66F7EA0, desc: DELETEoff 2 , blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964792 blk 18475 > > 2533:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 54/ 54, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F7F28, prev 25EE/D66F7EF0, desc: DELETEoff 4 , blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964795 blk 3125 > > 2534:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 54/ 54, tx: 1667601530, lsn: 25EE/D66F7F60, prev 25EE/D66F7F28, desc: DELETEoff 7 , blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964795 blk 3139 > > 56346:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 378/ 8198, tx: 1667601537, lsn: 25EE/D6DE33B0, prev 25EE/D6DE1628, desc: DELETEoff 6 KEYS_UPDATED , blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964815 blk 1938695 FPW > > 56347:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 54/ 54, tx: 1667601538, lsn: 25EE/D6DE53D0, prev 25EE/D6DE33B0, desc: LOCKoff 5: xid 1667601538: flags 0 LOCK_ONLY EXCL_LOCK , blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964792 blk 18460 > > 56348:rmgr: Heap len (rec/tot): 6563/ 6563, tx: 1667601538, lsn: 25EE/D6DE5408, prev 25EE/D6DE53D0, desc: UPDATEoff 5 xmax 1667601538 ; new off 3 xmax 0, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964792 blk 18499, blkref #1: rel 1663/13018/88964792blk 18460 > > 56349:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 64/ 64, tx: 1667601538, lsn: 25EE/D6DE6DC8, prev 25EE/D6DE5408, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 140, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964798 blk 2058 > > 56350:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 96/ 96, tx: 1667601538, lsn: 25EE/D6DE6E08, prev 25EE/D6DE6DC8, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 28, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964799 blk 5076 > > 56351:rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 80/ 80, tx: 1667601538, lsn: 25EE/D6DE6E68, prev 25EE/D6DE6E08, desc: INSERT_LEAFoff 88, blkref #0: rel 1663/13018/88964800 blk 3412 > > 56352:rmgr: Transaction len (rec/tot): 66/ 66, tx: 1667601527, lsn: 25EE/D6DE6EB8, prev 25EE/D6DE6E68, desc: COMMIT2019-11-16 03:01:39.326201 UTC; subxacts: 1667601528 1667601530 1667601537 1667601538 > So, this DELETE change triggers the issue. If I understand it correctly, > that means the transaction locked the tuple and then deleted it. But I > don't see any record about the lock. Hm. I don't think it necessarily means that. compute_new_xmax_infomask(), when called from heap_delete(), will e.g. set HEAP_KEYS_UPDATED when if (old_infomask & HEAP_XMAX_INVALID) is true. Which is the most common case. I actually find it *more* curious to *not* see that for a delete. I've not traced fully through it, yet. Alvaro, it's not clear to me whether the the multixact codepaths in compute_new_xmax_infomask() actually work as expected for deletes. > But this output seems a bit incomplete - there's an assignment record > for subxact 1667601528, without any records. And there's no assignment > for 1667601530. Can you simply post the whole WAL output for the > transaction LSN range, i.e. something like > > pg_waldump -s 25EE/D66F0438 -e 25EE/D6DE6F00 ... Yea, that'd be quite helpful. Which relations do the relfilenodes correspond to? Most importantly 1663/13018/88964815, 1663/13018/88964795, 1663/13018/88964792 You can look up the mapping, if there's not been any rewriting DDL since, with e.g. SELECT r, r::regclass FROM pg_filenode_relation(13018, 88964815) r; Greetings, Andres Freund
pgsql-bugs by date: