Re: pg_clog woes with 7.3.2 - Episode 2

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_clog woes with 7.3.2 - Episode 2
Date: 2003-04-21 17:40:32
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0304211138480.5883-100000@css120.ihs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 18 Apr 2003, Kevin Brown wrote:

> cbbrowne(at)cbbrowne(dot)com wrote:
> > The "noapic" option seems a quasi-magical elixir for many sorts of
> > ailments.
> >
> > I upgraded a box to 2.4.20 and discovered that my NIC was no longer
> > properly recognized until I threw that option in. Others in my
> > office have /apparently/ the same hardware, and found they didn't
> > need the option.
> >
> > As a "fix," it certainly seems to fall into the
> > "snakeoil/superstition" category. While it often seems to have a
> > useful effect, I haven't located any actual explanations as to why
> > it should be expected to work.
>
> Well, when it comes to booting a computer, the placebo effect doesn't
> really exist. :-)
>
> Normally I'd agree that "noapic" sounds and smells like snakeoil. The
> problem is that it has observable and repeatable effects on some
> systems, and thus can't really be classified as snakeoil (much as one
> might like to!).
>
> Why should it be expected to work? I don't know...possibly because
> the APIC hardware is buggy (perhaps in very subtle ways) on some
> systems? Possibly because the APIC driver is subtlely incompatible
> with certain APIC hardware? Possibly because the APIC driver has
> certain subtle bugs that only manifest themselves on certain
> motherboards with certain peripheral devices?
>
> Whatever the reason, the "noapic" option *does* work on certain
> systems, so it unfortunately isn't something that can be dismissed as
> mere superstition -- the computer isn't being asked its opinion of its
> own health here, nor does it "know" that it should get "well" when
> given different boot options. No "placebo effect" involved, just
> repeatable observation (that the observation isn't terribly repeatable
> *across* systems does not diminish the validity of the observation).

Just to add to this, on some of the first SMP systems I messed with there
was a setting for some SMP version of 1.1 or 1.4, and using 1.1 resulted
in an unstable box for me. 1.4 fixed all the issues. SMP on Intel is a
wild ride, and no two motherboards are equivalent. I've had good luck
with Supermicro and Intel SMP motherboards, although both have needed BIOS
updates at times.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2003-04-21 20:26:20 Re: Are we losing momentum?
Previous Message Neil Conway 2003-04-21 17:06:01 Re: Are we losing momentum?