I don't like the 3-bet either, but even if you are 3-betting, why would you make it so big? Making it $20 there is almost the same as shoving all in, as you're pot committed and you're getting called by about the same range as with an all-in. A smaller 3-bet to maybe $13 or $14 would give you a chance to fold and maybe get you action from a worse hand (though probably not, which is why I'm against 3-betting in the first place).
As played, I disagree with everyone and say fold to the all-in. And that's not just because I saw the results. I felt that way when I was looking at the top of the thread. This is not a scenario where we have a half-decent chance to suck out if we're beat. So despite getting 2:1 pot odds
, I say we're crushed 80-90% of the time here. He 4-bet all-in on a completely drawless flop when there was no raise preflop. And that was on top of your call-reraise move which screamed slowplay. I think the only time you're not crushed here is if the villain slowplayed AA or KK preflop and is also a very reckless player (of which you have no read).
Another way of looking at it is this. Would you call off here with AA? If not, then you probably don't want to call off with 92. Despite making trips, 92 is only one notch higher than AA and only beats one more hand.