On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:12 AM Michael Paquier <michael@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 09:46:47AM -0500, Justin King wrote: > > Nope, it was just these tables that were looping over and over while > > nothing else was getting autovac'd. I'm happy to share the full log > > if you'd like. > > Thanks, that could help. If that's very large, it could be a problem > to send that to the lists, but you could send me directly a link to > it and I'll try to extract more information for the lists. While > testing for reproducing the issue, I have noticed that basically one > set of catalog tables happened to see this "skipping redundant" log. > And I am wondering if we have a match with the set of catalog tables > looping. Sounds great. I will email you directly with a link! > > I did have to remove it from this state, but I can undo my workaround > > and, undoubtedly, it'll end up back there. Let me know if there's > > something specific you'd like me to provide when it happens! > > For now I think it's fine. Note that Julien and I have an environment > where the issue can be reproduced easily (it takes roughly 12 hours > until the wraparound cutoffs are reached with the benchmark and > settings used), and we are checking things using a patched instance > with 2aa6e33 reverted. I think that we are accumulating enough > evidence that this change was not a good idea anyway thanks to the > information you sent, so likely we'll finish first by a revert of > 2aa6e33 from the master and REL_12_STABLE branches, before looking at > the issues with the catalogs for those anti-wraparound and > non-aggressive jobs (this looks like a relcache issue with the so-said > catalogs). This is encouraging. As I mentioned, we have a workaround in place for the moment, but don't hesitate if you need anything else from me. Thanks for jumping in on the thread, it was nice validation to know that I wasn't the only one seeing the issue! > -- > Michael
