From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, current-users(at)netbsd(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL, NetBSD and NFS |
Date: | 2003-02-02 19:18:17 |
Message-ID: | 200302021418.17388.darcy@druid.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sunday 02 February 2003 12:26, Tom Lane wrote:
> "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> writes:
> > Also odd, why would running over NFS have any bearing on it if we
> > could find such a place?
>
> Yup, 'tis the question. The only theory I have been able to come up
> with is that there's something flaky about your network hardware,
Possible but two separate networks?
> At this point I think you need to rebuild with --enable-debug and
> --enable-cassert (if you didn't already) and then capture some
> stack traces from the stuck backend. We have to find out what the
> backend thinks it's doing.
That was going to be my next step.
> BTW: *are* we certain it's associated with NFS, and not a hardware
> problem on your NetBSD box? Can you perform the same tests running
> the database off a local disk?
That box is running 5 production database engines on 5 different ports. This
is the 6th one and the only difference is that it is running from the NFS
mounted drive.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-02 19:23:35 | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
Previous Message | Kurt Roeckx | 2003-02-02 19:13:40 | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |