On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 12:01 AM Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote: > + if (got_standby_delay_timeout) > + SendRecoveryConflictWithBufferPin(RECOVERY_CONFLICT_BUFFERPIN); > + else if (got_standby_deadlock_timeout) > + { > > Shouldn't we break out of the loop when either got_standby_delay_timeout or > got_standby_deadlock_timeout becomes true? Otherwise, the loop continues with > those flags still set, which could cause SendRecoveryConflictWithBufferPin() > to > be called unnecessarily in the subsequent cycles. > > > + if (BufferGetRefCount(buffer) <= 1) > > Should this be "BufferGetRefCount(buffer) == 1" instead? I don't think > BufferGetRefCount(buffer) should ever return 0 here. If that's correct, > would it make sense to explicitly detect that case, for example: > > ----------------- > uint32 refcount = BufferGetRefCount(buffer); > > Assert(refcount > 0); > > if (refcount == 0) > elog(ERROR, "buffer refcount dropped to zero while waiting for > cleanup lock"); > > if (refcount == 1) > break; > -----------------
I've updated the patch based on these comments. Attached is the latest version. I removed the TAP test from this patch for now. I'll consider adding a test for this separately later. BTW, I'm just wondering whether ResolveRecoveryConflictWithLock() might have the same issue. I need to investigate that further. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
v3-0001-Fix-deadlock-detector-activation-in-a-recovery-co.patch
Description: Binary data
