On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:35 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
That's right and that's exactly what I mentioned in my conclusion too.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
