On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 1:15 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
> @Robert, Myself and Prabhat have tried running the test-cases that
> caused the checkpointer process to crash earlier multiple times but we
> are not able to reproduce it both with and without the patch. However,
> from the stack trace shared earlier by Prabhat, it is clear that the
> checkpointer process panicked due to fsync failure. But, there is no
> further data to know the exact reason for the fsync failure. From the
> code of checkpointer process (basically the function to process fsync
> requests) it is understood that, the checkpointer process can PANIC
> due to one of the following two reasons.
Oh, I didn't realize this was a panic due to an fsync() failure when I
looked at the stack trace before. I think it's concerning that
fsync() failed on Prabhat's machine, and it would be interesting to
know why that happened, but I don't see how this patch could possibly
*cause* fsync() to fail, so I think we can say that whatever is
happening on his machine is unrelated to this patch -- and probably
also unrelated to PostgreSQL.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
