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

Re: [Win32] Problem with rename()

From: "Peter Brant" <Peter(dot)Brant(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Bugs for PostgreSQL" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>,"PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: [Win32] Problem with rename()
Date: 2006-06-17 17:25:37
Message-ID: 44945708.E840.00BE.0@wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-patches
>>> On 16.06.2006 at 23:21:21, in message
<200606162121(dot)k5GLLLw13054(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Yea.  Where you using WAL archiving?  We will have a fix in 8.1.5 to
> prevent multiple archivers from starting.  Perhaps that was a cause.
> 
Not at the time, no.  The rename in question was just a regular WAL
segment rename.

> Yes, I just reread that thread.  I also am confused where to go from
> here.
> 
Yeah, it's unfortunate that our best theory (a _commit on a deleted
file) just didn't seem to be supported by the evidence.  Although the
servers which see a heavy SELECT load are now Linux, we still have a
couple of Windows servers receiving the normal replication traffic.  We
still get regular fsync errors after the scheduled CLUSTERs so if you do
find a fix (or come up with a new theory), there's a test bed there (at
least for now).

> Were you the only one use Win32 in heavy usage?  You were on Win2003.

> Were there some bugs in the OS that got fixed later.
...
> Yep.  What has me baffled is why no one else is seeing the problem.
> We had a rash of reports, and now all is quiet.
>
We might be somewhat more susceptible than most too.  Due to the way
our middle tier parcels out queries, some connections might sit idle for
a long time.  Per Tom's explanation in the original thread, this is an
important factor.  Ultimately if a concurrent rename isn't possible in
Windows (and that looks likely), it's going to be a problem as things
stand now.

Pete



In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Devrim GUNDUZDate: 2006-06-17 21:43:01
Subject: 7.4.13 initdb fails on Turkish locale
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2006-06-17 12:51:18
Subject: Re: BUG #2484: pg_dump not support < redirect

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-06-17 17:43:06
Subject: Re: Test request for Stats collector performance improvement
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-06-17 15:47:46
Subject: Re: plpython improvements

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