| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: pgstat wait timeout (RE: contrib/cache_scan) |
| Date: | 2014-03-12 16:51:45 |
| Message-ID: | 15559.1394643105@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> We've seen sporadic reports of that sort of behavior for years, but no
>> developer has ever been able to reproduce it reliably. Now that you've
>> got a reproducible case, do you want to poke into it and see what's going
>> on?
> I didn't know we were trying to reproduce it, nor that it was a mystery.
> Do anything that causes serious IO constipation, and you will probably see
> that message.
The cases that are a mystery to me are where there's no reason to believe
that I/O is particularly overloaded. But perhaps Kaigai-san's example is
only that ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-03-12 17:41:05 | Re: The case against multixact GUCs |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-03-12 16:45:18 | Re: The case against multixact GUCs |