Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?

From: Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?
Date: 2006-05-23 03:59:30
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0605222055360.7012@discord.home.frostconsultingllc.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 21 May 2006, Jeff Frost wrote:

>> So the chances of the original problem being archiver related are
>> receding...
>
> This is possible, but I guess I should try and reproduce the actual problem
> with the same archive_command script and a CIFS mount just to see what
> happens. Perhaps the real root of the problem is elsewhere, it just seems
> strange since the archive_command is the only postgres related process that
> accesses the CIFS share. More later.

I tried both pulling the plug on the CIFS server and unsharing the CIFS share,
but pgbench continued completely unconcerned. I guess the failure mode of the
NAS device in the customer colo must be something different that I don't yet
know how to simulate. I suspect I'll have to wait till it happens again and
try to gather some more data before restarting the NAS device. Thanks for all
your suggestions guys!

--
Jeff Frost, Owner <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
Frost Consulting, LLC http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908 FAX: 650-649-1954

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-05-23 04:02:25 Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?
Previous Message Thomas F. O'Connell 2006-05-23 01:24:10 Re: Unkillable Backend Processes

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-05-23 04:02:25 Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-05-23 01:25:42 Re: [HACKERS] Duplicate definition of LOCALEDIR