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

Re: Postgresql 8.4.1 segfault, backtrace

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Brown <mbrown(at)fensystems(dot)co(dot)uk>, Richard Neill <rn214(at)hermes(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgresql 8.4.1 segfault, backtrace
Date: 2009-09-25 07:05:32
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 2. By chance, a shared-cache-inval flush comes through while it's doing
>> that, causing all non-open, non-nailed relcache entries to be discarded.
>> Including, in particular, the one that is "next" according to the
>> hash_seq_search's status.

> I thought we have catchup interrupts disabled at that point. Where does
> the flush come from?

Actual overrun.  Disabling the catchup interrupt certainly can't
improve that.

(Michael's core dump showed that the failed backend was about 7000 SI
messages behind, where the overrun limit is 4K...)

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Annita VenetiDate: 2009-09-25 07:56:22
Subject: Re: BUG #5063: MS Access crashes by quiting after linking tables with PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2009-09-25 06:53:24
Subject: Re: Postgresql 8.4.1 segfault, backtrace

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group