From: | Robert Creager <Robert(dot)Creager(at)Sun(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PGHackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1 |
Date: | 2005-11-02 21:18:55 |
Message-ID: | 20051102141855.0000490c@C118181.stortek.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 15:37:05 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Creager <Robert(dot)Creager(at)Sun(dot)com> writes:
> > I can reproduce very quickly. Looks like I should try the patch in 248
> > first to see if it fixes 8.1RC1?
>
> Excellent. Yes, the second patch is higher priority, but please try
> both while you're at it.
>
I've put in patch 2. I'm kicking the s**t out of it, with no problems so far.
I'll let it run for a while longer.
One note is that I did hit the CS switch problem, but with a combination of
production app and my test app. But, it took much more activity, wasn't as
severe (queries were typically staying < 10 seconds) and the db came out of it a
few minutes after my test app stopped.
I'll put in the first patch and re-run the tests.
Cheers,
Rob
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-11-02 21:26:09 | Re: pg_restore [archiver] file offset in dump file is too |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-11-02 20:42:42 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |