Re: SLRU limits

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Subject: Re: SLRU limits
Date: 2011-06-09 17:54:45
Message-ID: 4DF108E5.8050900@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 09.06.2011 19:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> (BTW, while I've not looked at the SLRU code in several years, I'm quite
> unconvinced that this is only a matter of filename lengths.)

I don't see anything but the filename length needing adjustment. In
fact, when I hacked predicate.c to ignore the issue and use too high
page numbers, I ended up with files like "100AB" in the directory. So
slru.c goes merrily above the "limit", it just won't recognize them when
it's time to truncate the slru because of the unexpected length, and
will not clean them up.

(perhaps not worth risking it in 9.1 anyway, though..)

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-06-09 17:55:02 Re: Invalid byte sequence for encoding "UTF8", caused due to non wide-char-aware downcase_truncate_identifier() function on WINDOWS
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2011-06-09 17:42:05 Re: could not truncate directory "pg_serial": apparent wraparound