Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test
Date
Msg-id 30330.1575739251@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 5:01 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> A possible theory as to what's happening is that the kernel scheduler
>> is discriminating against listener2's signal management thread(s)
>> and not running them until everything else goes idle for a moment.

> If we have to believe that theory then why the other similar test is
> not showing the problem.

There are fewer processes involved in that case, so I don't think
it disproves the theory that this is a scheduler glitch.

> I have also debugged
> it in the Windows box that as soon as the notify sends the signal, the
> signal thread receives it and comes out of ConnectNamedPipe and does
> the processing to dispatch the signal.

Have you done that debugging on a machine that's showing the failure?
Since only some of our Windows critters are showing it, it's evidently
dependent on environment or Windows version somehow.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ssl passphrase callback
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: psql small improvement patch