| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrew Bartley" <abartley(at)evolvosystems(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postmaster processes running out of control? |
| Date: | 2002-03-22 06:20:19 |
| Message-ID: | 29372.1016778019@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Andrew Bartley" <abartley(at)evolvosystems(dot)com> writes:
> 2002-03-22 16:44:28 [383] DEBUG: SIInsertDataEntry: table is 70% full,
> signaling postmaster
> 2002-03-22 16:44:28 [383] NOTICE: RegisterSharedInvalid: SI buffer
> overflow
> 2002-03-22 16:44:28 [315] NOTICE: InvalidateSharedInvalid: cache state
> reset
AFAIK these notices are completely harmless (and they have in fact been
downgraded to DEBUG level in 7.2). SI buffer overrun is an expected
condition when a large number of system catalog updates are committed
at once.
> In this circumstance it is causing a peer process job that useses
> persistant connections to receive a SIGPIPE signal.
I think the SIGPIPE has little or no direct connection to the SI buffer
overruns --- what *exactly* are you doing and what are you seeing?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heiko Klein | 2002-03-22 09:04:20 | Huge Performance Difference on Similar Query in Pg7.2 |
| Previous Message | Andrew Bartley | 2002-03-22 06:04:06 | Re: Postmaster processes running out of control? |