From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18616: Long-running hash index build can not be interrupted |
Date: | 2024-09-13 19:22:26 |
Message-ID: | 122464.1726255346@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 13.09.2024 17:51, Pavel Borisov wrote:
>> I was unable to reproduce it on my machine with these settings. Tried statement timeouts 30-120s. Index build appears
>> to be in interruptible phase on my system.
> Yes, the patch works for me. The query is interrupted as expected.
> But I wonder, why don't you the see same?
I see the same result as Alexander: the query fails to time out
after the expected 90 seconds, and it's looping in _h_indexbuild.
Looking at hashbuild, the effective sort_threshold depends on
NBuffers, so maybe if you have that set to a high enough value
it fails to go into the sort path? If I use
SET maintenance_work_mem = '128MB';
instead of the suggested 1GB, I don't see the problem.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-13 19:45:11 | Re: BUG #18616: Long-running hash index build can not be interrupted |
Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2024-09-13 18:00:00 | Re: BUG #18616: Long-running hash index build can not be interrupted |