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

Re: [HACKERS] vacuum crash

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] vacuum crash
Date: 1998-10-08 06:33:50
Message-ID: 361C5CCE.DD478C15@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Here is a modified version of the vacuum crash I am studying.
> Interesting is that if I do a 'vacuum getting' instead of 'select * 
> from getting;vacuum;', I see a different error message.  Rather than a 
> crash due to an Assert(), psql shows:
>         NOTICE:  AbortTransaction and not in in-progress state
>         NOTICE:  AbortTransaction and not in in-progress state
> and the postmaster log file shows:
>         ERROR:  cannot write block -1 of  [] blind
>         AbortCurrentTransaction
>         NOTICE:  AbortTransaction and not in in-progress state
> This can be debugged by commenting out the psql command at the end,
> running the script, and then running a backend from gdb and doing
> 'vacuum getting'.

Well Oleg, you are not alone now. Others are seeing your problem, so it
is much more likely to be fixed than when it was just one person
reporting the symptom. If you are familiar with backend code then
perhaps you could help track down the problem. If you aren't familiar
with it, you may be interested in volunteering to test patches from
Bruce. This would be especially helpful since you have a real talent for
demonstrating this problem :)

                      - Tom

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas G. LockhartDate: 1998-10-08 07:13:37
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items
Previous:From: bishengDate: 1998-10-08 05:00:51
Subject:

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