| From: | Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Lock partitions |
| Date: | 2006-10-18 17:22:41 |
| Message-ID: | 453662E1.3080802@osdl.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Hmm, what sort of errors are we talking about?
>
>> ERROR: too many LWLocks taken
>
> That really shouldn't happen ... are you sure you did a full recompile
> after changing NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS?
>
> Actually ... wait a moment. The default value of NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS
> is already 16 (1 << LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS where the latter is 4).
> Are you saying you set LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS to 16? That would be
> way too many partitions. I was thinking of testing
> LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS in the range of about 2 to 5.
Oops, I can't read bit shifting. =p I'll do again.
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-10-18 17:23:22 | Re: Additional stats for Relations |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-18 17:18:41 | Re: Lock partitions |