| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: sblock state on FreeBSD 6.1 |
| Date: | 2006-05-03 17:37:03 |
| Message-ID: | 17513.1146677823@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 11:06:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, the stats socket seems like a really good bet to me, since all
>> the backends will be interested in the same socket. The
>> client-to-backend sockets are only touched by two processes each, so
>> don't seem like big contention sources.
> Do we take specific steps to ensure that we don't block when attempting
> to write to these sockets?
Well, we have the socket set to O_NONBLOCK mode. Whether that avoids
the problem you're seeing ...
> BTW, this server does have command string logging on, so if this is a
> stats issue that probably made the problem worse.
Can you turn that off for a bit and see if it affects things?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lukas Smith | 2006-05-03 17:40:40 | Re: inclusion of hstore software in main tarball |
| Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2006-05-03 17:06:09 | inclusion of hstore software in main tarball |