On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 1:15 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coe...@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
