| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong |
| Date: | 2007-09-11 17:12:33 |
| Message-ID: | 13756.1189530753@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> NOTICE: database "contrib_regression" does not exist, skipping
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans
> With hash_seq_search ERROR, it was partially a false alarm. I've had some
> old postgres daemon hanging around and writing that to the log.
> Although I remember seeing that hash_seq_search message recently when
> dealing with this bug, it does not show up in the course of standard
> regression tests.
Yeah, it's not there on your buildfarm reports, but that's not totally
surprising. I would expect it to start showing up after 100 failed
checkpoint attempts, which is how long it'd take the bgwriter's
hash_seq_search table to overflow ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sergey E. Koposov | 2007-09-11 17:18:36 | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-11 17:06:47 | Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings |