Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: GiST concurrency commited)

From: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: GiST concurrency commited)
Date: 2005-08-30 09:25:52
Message-ID: 43142620.2010405@sigaev.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Fixed in 8.0, 7.4 and 7.3 branches.

Tom Lane wrote:
> Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> writes:
>
>>http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.pl
>>http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.sh
>
>
> BTW, these scripts seem to indicate that there's a GIST or
> contrib/intarray problem in the 8.0 branch. I was trying to use 'em
> to test REL8_0_STABLE branch tip to verify my t_ctid chain backpatch,
> and I pretty consistently see "Problem with update":
>
> Start: parallel mode with 4 flows
> Problem with update {77,77}:0 count:1 at concur.pl line 91.
> Issuing rollback() for database handle being DESTROY'd without explicit disconnect().
> Problem with update {43,24}:3 count:1 at concur.pl line 91.
> Issuing rollback() for database handle being DESTROY'd without explicit disconnect().
> Problem with update {43,43}:2 count:1 at concur.pl line 91.
> Issuing rollback() for database handle being DESTROY'd without explicit disconnect().
> 1 flow finish. Stats: ni:75000 nu:1661 nd:216 nv:13(nf:3) nt:780
> All flow finish; status: 255; elapsed time: 265.48 sec
>
> Is this something that can be fixed for 8.0.4?
>
> regards, tom lane

--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2005-08-30 09:39:00 Re: Pre-allocated free space for row updating (like
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2005-08-30 09:14:01 Re: Query Sampling