| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | ashwath(dot)rao(at)altair(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14555: EBUSY error on read() on NFS |
| Date: | 2017-02-20 04:43:24 |
| Message-ID: | 18315.1487565804@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
ashwath(dot)rao(at)altair(dot)com writes:
> Once we have this, we seem to have errors only on that one file, but EBUSY
> is _really_ puzzling. It's not one of the valid errno setting for a read()
> system call.
Indeed. Some googling suggests that this might be a known issue
in the kernel: Red Hat fixed something with similar symptoms in their
RHEL6 series about a year ago. You might want to check for SLES updates,
and pester SUSE if there's not a fix available. It seems highly unlikely
that it's Postgres' fault in any meaningful sense, in any case.
(FWIW, a lot of Postgres hackers consider NFS to be too unreliable to
keep a database on. NFS is great, don't get me wrong, but it's got a
very long track record of intermittent weirdness like this. If you're
trying to get from three-nines to five-nines reliability, keeping your
data on NFS is a serious stumbling block to getting there.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2017-02-20 05:00:47 | Re: BUG #14555: EBUSY error on read() on NFS |
| Previous Message | ashwath.rao | 2017-02-20 03:01:21 | BUG #14555: EBUSY error on read() on NFS |