From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Oleg Jurtšenko <oleg(dot)jurtsenko(at)fts(dot)ee>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |
Date: | 2009-12-09 04:08:34 |
Message-ID: | 21255.1260331714@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2009/12/8 Oleg Jurtenko <oleg(dot)jurtsenko(at)fts(dot)ee>:
>> You are right, it crushes on following statement: "select
>> instr(ad_parent_tree(?,?),'|'||?||'|') AS isItsOwnChild from dual;"
>>
>> max_stack_depth is commented out, I think it has the default value:
>> #max_stack_depth = 2MB
> Well, my guess is you have your kernel limit for max stack depth set
> to something very small. See:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/runtime-config-resource.html#GUC-MAX-STACK-DEPTH
> You can do "SHOW max_stack_depth;" to confirm the setting for that
> parameter. But I'm not quite sure how to check what value is being
> applied to PG. Sounds like it's smaller than 2MB, though. You may be
> able to reduce max_stack_depth to prevent the crash, but then you'll
> get an error instead.
The weird thing about this is that recent versions of PG try to adjust
max_stack_depth automatically. The only ways I can see for that to
fail is if
(1) the platform hasn't got getrlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), or
(2) the effective stack rlimit is so tiny Postgres doesn't believe it,
which looks to be anything under 100KB.
The claim in the docs that the default value is 2MB is a vast
oversimplification of reality, so I'd be interested to know what "show
max_stack_depth" actually reports. It'd also be useful to run
"ulimit -a" in the context in which the postmaster is normally started
(that's NOT your interactive shell session, usually --- try adding
that to the postmaster start script).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2009-12-09 04:47:49 | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-09 03:12:55 | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |