Re: BUG #16927: Postgres can`t access WAL files - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:44:29PM +0200, Ярослав Пашинский wrote:
> So, I started test on my Windows server that we using for replica on
> instance, which I copied from master. The binarys was unpatched, that
> you sent me here. The system is: windows server 2016, os build 14393.4283.
> To emulate load I used pgbench with such parameters -t 10000 -c 50 -j 20.
> After couple of running test in log file I found almost same errors:
> "2021-03-18 11:27:14.322 EET [3748] LOG:  could not rename temporary
> statistics file "pg_stat_tmp/global.tmp" to "pg_stat_tmp/global.stat":
> Permission denied
> 2021-03-18 11:27:18.928 EET [692] LOG:  using stale statistics instead of
> current ones because stats collector is not responding"
> ...and
> "2021-03-18 11:48:49.630 EET [6476] LOG:  could not rename file
> "pg_wal/00000001000000650000008F": Permission denied"
> So I decided to switch to patched binaries and sometimes get only this one
> error:
> "2021-03-18 12:27:14.571 EET [4840] LOG:  could not rename temporary
> statistics file "pg_stat_tmp/global.tmp" to "pg_stat_tmp/global.stat":
> Permission denied
> 2021-03-18 12:27:19.178 EET [7556] LOG:  using stale statistics instead of
> current ones because stats collector is not responding"
> Which is not very critical, so it`s ok.

Okay, so it looks like a very good news to me.  With the patched
binaries you are not seeing the renaming problem with the WAL files
anymore.

> On other hand, on developer server (Windows Server 2016 (version 1607, OS
> build 14393.4225))  with real load and unpatched binaries now I got no
> errors about about pg_wal and gets only twice this error:
> "2021-03-18 12:07:26.153 EET [2956] LOG:  could not rename temporary
> statistics file "pg_stat_tmp/global.tmp" to "pg_stat_tmp/global.stat":
> Permission denied"
>
> So, keep testing. That's strange for now. I am thinking about changing
> binaries on prod server, but it will be possible on Saturday.

Yes, I think that it would be good to do more tests, as it may be
possible that what you are seeing does not repeat.  What you are
reporting is encouraging though.  Thanks!

By the way, it is very important to report that to the community
mailing lists.  Could you add pgsql-bugs when replying please?
--
Michael