| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MemoryContextSwitchTo (Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11) |
| Date: | 2009-01-17 17:01:28 |
| Message-ID: | 1232211688.31669.279.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 11:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Can we add something to memory contexts to make this fail every time?
>
> No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
> on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
> TopTransactionContext control block right in the same place where the
> old one was.
Can we put a identifier into header of each control block, an ascending
value that is unlikely duplicate between calls? That way we'd be able to
tell immediately it wasn't the same block, even if it is in the same
place. (In assert mode only, of course).
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-17 17:15:46 | Re: MemoryContextSwitchTo (Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-17 16:35:18 | Re: MemoryContextSwitchTo (Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-17 17:15:46 | Re: MemoryContextSwitchTo (Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-17 16:35:18 | Re: MemoryContextSwitchTo (Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11) |