Re: buildfarm logging versus embedded nulls

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: buildfarm logging versus embedded nulls
Date: 2010-03-12 22:11:48
Message-ID: 16061.1268431908@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Still meditating on this ... and it strikes me that the pgstat.c code
>> is really uncommunicative about problems. In particular,
>> pgstat_read_statsfile_timestamp and pgstat_read_statsfile don't complain
>> at all about being unable to read a stats file.

> Yeah, I had the same thought.

OK, I'll add some logging.

>> Lastly, backend_read_statsfile is designed to send an inquiry message
>> every time through the loop, ie, every 10 msec. This is said to be in
>> case the stats collector drops one. But is this enough to flood the
>> collector and make things worse? I wonder if there should be some
>> backoff there.

> I also think the autovacuum worker minimum timestamp may be playing
> games with the retry logic too. Maybe a worker is requesting a new file
> continuously because pgstat is not able to provide one before the
> deadline is past, and thus overloading it. I still think that 500ms is
> too much for a worker, but backing off all the way to 10ms seems too
> much. Maybe it should just be, say, 100ms.

But we don't advance the deadline within the wait loop, so (in theory)
a single requestor shouldn't be able to trigger more than one stats file
update. I wonder though if an autovac worker could make many such
requests over its lifespan ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-03-12 22:24:55 Re: Reposnse from backend when wrong user/database request send
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2010-03-12 22:01:55 Re: Reposnse from backend when wrong user/database request send