Re: Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 & query cancel

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 & query cancel
Date: 2014-12-06 00:15:08
Message-ID: 54824A8C.8080904@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/5/14, 5:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/05/2014 02:41 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Perhaps we should also officially recommend production servers be setup
>> to create core files. AFAIK the only downside is the time it would take
>> to write a core that's huge because of shared buffers, but perhaps
>> there's some way to avoid writing those? (That means the core won't help
>> if the bug is due to something in a buffer, but that seems unlikely
>> enough that the tradeoff is worth it...)
>
> Not practical in a lot of cases. For example, this user was unwilling
> to enable core dumps on the production replicas because writing out the
> 16GB of shared buffers they had took over 10 minutes in a test.

Which is why I wondered if there's a way to avoid writing out shared buffers...

But at least getting a stack trace would be a big start.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2014-12-06 05:10:13 Re: Parallel Seq Scan
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-12-06 00:01:24 Re: Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 & query cancel