| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong |
| Date: | 2007-09-11 17:29:37 |
| Message-ID: | 14042.1189531777@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
> Yes, indeed. After several make installcheck's
> I get
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans, cannot start one on "smgr
> relation table"
> ERROR: too many active hash_seq_search scans, cannot start one on "smgr
> relation table"
Hm, so that must be coming from smgrcloseall(), which is the only user
of hash_seq_search on SMgrRelationHash. I bet that's popping up once a
second and the bgwriter is getting nothing done, because it's failing
again at the bottom of error recovery :-(. It's a good thing you
happened to notice those messages, because this is a pretty bad bug.
Anyway, I've committed a fix for that, so we can get back to the main
question, which is why you're getting the fsync error in the first place.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-09-11 17:32:11 | Re: Final Thoughts for 8.3 on LWLocking and Scalability |
| Previous Message | Sergey E. Koposov | 2007-09-11 17:18:36 | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong |