On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Pitts <jpitts(at)bplglobal(dot)net> writes:
>> On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The 100 temp table creations probably will do that just fine.
>> Is there a way to verify this?
> You could add an elog(LOG, "message") into ResetPlanCache so you could
> tell when it had been called.
Done. Sometimes I see it, sometimes not.
>> I don't follow. Are you suggesting I begin another transaction on connection 1 with a read, and that
>> would provoke the crash?
> Yes. The rollback only sets the stage for the next transaction to try
> to use a snapshot that isn't there anymore.
Oh, duh. A read from the same session that rolled-back. That didn't get it working (failing?) however.
Running concurrent instances of this test reliably provokes the crash on un-patched 8.4.2.
They do not provoke a crash with the patch. That's what i was looking for.
> regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Oleg Jurtšenko||Date: 2010-01-14 20:22:53|
|Subject: Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through
|Previous:||From: Tim Bunce||Date: 2010-01-14 18:41:52|
|Subject: Re: Termination When Switching between PL/Perl and PL/PerlU|