Re: terminated by signal 6 problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: terminated by signal 6 problem
Date: 2004-08-11 21:22:29
Message-ID: 18873.1092259349@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> I have seen similar when running under heavy load with high frequent
> insert+delete+vacuum. What happens is that adding another item to an
> index page in the btree access method fails. It seems to me that the
> decision to add an item to a page and the real work of actually adding
> it are not atomic, so that under certain race conditions two backends
> make the same decision while one would have to split the page.

Sure it is. _bt_insertonpg is holding an exclusive lock on the page
the entire time.

We've seen reports like this once or twice before, so I think that there
may indeed be some corner-case bug involved, but it's not going to be
possible to find it without a test case ... or at least a debuggable
core dump from the PANIC.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2004-08-11 21:43:44 Re: terminated by signal 6 problem
Previous Message Joe Conway 2004-08-11 20:54:30 Re: terminated by signal 6 problem