Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure
Date
Msg-id ziijmkyltlgqh47mvnfbo4vjwq6lzor6euy7kt4vk2epy43bzw@xqteb5mcdtxa
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2025-06-06 15:37:45 -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> There shouldn't be any concurrent accesses here, so I don't really see how the
> above would explain the problem (the IO can only ever be modified by one
> backend, initially the "owning backend", then, when submitted, by the IO
> worker, and then again by the backend).

The symptoms I can reproduce are slightly different than Alexander's - it's
the assertion failure reported upthread by Tom.

FWIW, I can continue to repro the assertion after removing the use of the
bitfield in PgAioHandle. So the problem indeed seems to be be independent of
the bitfields.

I'm continuing to investigate.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: jian he
Date:
Subject: Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
Next
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Proposal to Enable/Disable Index using ALTER INDEX