Observe the smoking gun at
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=muledt=2015-08-02%2003%3A30%3A02
to wit this extract from pg_upgrade_server.log:
command:
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/tmp_check/install//home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/inst/bin/pg_ctl
-w -D
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/tmp_check/data.old
-o stop pg_upgrade_server.log 21
LOG: received fast shutdown request
LOG: aborting any active transactions
LOG: shutting down
waiting for server to shut down.LOG: database system is shut down
done
server stopped
command:
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/tmp_check/install//home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/inst/bin/pg_ctl
-w -l pg_upgrade_server.log -D
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/tmp_check/data
-o -p 57832 -b -c synchronous_commit=off -c fsync=off -c full_page_writes=off
-c listen_addresses='' -c unix_socket_permissions=0700 -c
unix_socket_directories='/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade'
start pg_upgrade_server.log 21
waiting for server to startFATAL: lock file
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/.s.PGSQL.57832.lock
already exists
HINT: Is another postmaster (PID 12295) using socket file
/home/pg/build-farm-4.15.1/build/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/bin/pg_upgrade/.s.PGSQL.57832?
stopped waiting
pg_ctl: could not start server
Examine the log output.
Now, the old postmaster clearly was shut down, so how come the socket lock
file still existed? The answer is that what pg_ctl is watching for is for
the postmaster.pid file to disappear, and *the postmaster deletes its lock
files in the wrong order*. strace'ing HEAD on my own machine shows this
sequence of kernel calls during postmaster stop:
wait4(-1, 0x723f3cbc, WNOHANG, NULL) = -1 ECHILD (No child processes)
stat(backup_label, 0x723f3bd0)= -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
munmap(0x7fd16e8f8000, 2316)= 0
unlink(/dev/shm/PostgreSQL.1804289383) = 0
semctl(1547862018, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1547894787, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1547927556, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1547960325, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1547993094, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1548025863, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1548058632, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
semctl(1548091401, 0, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
shmdt(0x7fd16e8f9000) = 0
munmap(0x7fd165b3c000, 148488192) = 0
shmctl(194314244, IPC_RMID, 0) = 0
unlink(/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432)= 0
unlink(postmaster.pid)= 0
unlink(/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432.lock) = 0
exit_group(0) = ?
+++ exited with 0 +++
I haven't looked to find out why the unlinks happen in this order, but on
a heavily loaded machine, it's certainly possible that the process would
lose the CPU after unlink(postmaster.pid), and then a new postmaster
could get far enough to see the socket lock file still there. So that
would account for low-probability failures in the pg_upgradecheck test,
which is exactly what we've been seeing.
It seems clear to me that what the exit sequence ought to be is
unlink socket, unlink socket lock file, repeat for any additional
sockets, then unlink postmaster.pid. Can anyone think of a reason
why the current ordering isn't a bug?
Another point that's rather obvious from the trace is that at no time
do we bother to close the postmaster's TCP socket; it only goes away when
the postmaster process dies. So there's a second race condition here:
a new postmaster could be unable to bind() to the desired TCP port
because the old one still has it open. I think we've seen unexplained
failures of the TCP-socket-in-use variety, too.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
