Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission

From: "Thomas H(dot)" <me(at)alternize(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Brant" <Peter(dot)Brant(at)wicourts(dot)gov>,<pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Subject: Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission
Date: 2006-10-23 22:26:50
Message-ID: 03fd01c6f6f2$568c1f60$0201a8c0@iwing (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-patches
> The log messages you have don't make it clear which process is trying to
> do the fsync, but I would expect it to be the bgwriter.  (Possibly you
> should modify log_line_prefix to include PID so we can tell a bit
> better.)

you're right (as always :-)). its the "writer process" (pid 5196) that 
outputs the error messages:

2006-10-24 00:09:09 [5196] ERROR:  XX000: storage sync failed on magnetic 
disk: Permission denied
2006-10-24 00:09:09 [5196] LOCATION:  smgrsync, smgr.c:888
2006-10-24 00:09:10 [5196] LOG:  42501: could not fsync segment 0 of 
relation 1663/3964774/6422947: Permission denied
2006-10-24 00:09:10 [5196] LOCATION:  mdsync, md.c:785

and in this case, its process 5988 that keeps the file handle open (its 
entry in pg_class is already deleted):

\BaseNamedObjects\pgident: postgres: db_outnow outnow1 127.0.0.1(2362) idle
D:\DB\PostgreSQL-8.2\data\base\3964774\6422947 (1 references, 1 handle)

... while pid 5196 constantly tries to open the file (for over 15min in this 
case), until...


00:22:18 postgres.exe:5196 OPEN 
D:\DB\PostgreSQL-8.2\data\base\3964774\6422947 DELETE PEND Options: Open 
Access: 0012019F
00:22:19 postgres.exe:5196 OPEN 
D:\DB\PostgreSQL-8.2\data\base\3964774\6422947 DELETE PEND Options: Open 
Access: 0012019F
00:22:20 postgres.exe:5988 CLOSE 
D:\DB\PostgreSQL-8.2\data\base\3964774\6422947 SUCCESS
00:22:20 postgres.exe:5196 OPEN 
D:\DB\PostgreSQL-8.2\data\base\3964774\6422947 NOT FOUND Options: Open 
Access: 0012019F

is that of any use? what more logging options would be interesting?

- thomas 



In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2006-10-24 02:03:07
Subject: Bug related to out of memory condition
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-23 22:00:22
Subject: Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Matthew O'ConnorDate: 2006-10-23 22:39:23
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] smartvacuum() instead of autovacuum
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-23 22:00:22
Subject: Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group