From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: sequential scans that pick up only deleted records do not honor query cancel or timeout |
Date: | 2012-05-22 21:08:32 |
Message-ID: | 8558.1337720912@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Basically, $subject says it all. It's pretty easy to reproduce:
> delete all the records from a large table and execute any sequentially
> scanning query before autocvacuum comes around and cleans the table
> up; the query will be uncancellable. This can result in fairly
> pathological behavior in i/o constrained systems because the query
> will bog itself down writing out hint bits for minutes or hours
> without any way to cancel or effective i/o throttling (unlike vacuum).
> IMO, this should be backpatched, and is likely fixed by injecting an
> interrupts check at a strategic location. But where? I was thinking
> in heapgetpage() but here are no checks elsehwere in heapam.c which is
> a red flag.
heapgetpage() seems like the most reasonable place to me, as there we'll
only be making the check once per page not once per tuple.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | valgog | 2012-05-22 21:36:23 | BUG #6661: out-of-order XID insertion in KnownAssignedXids |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-05-22 20:08:13 | Re: BUG #6653: Service does not start in standby-mode |