From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags |
Date: | 2005-11-02 12:03:57 |
Message-ID: | 8764rbjlxu.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> > I happen to think that except for the rare assertion that has major
> > performance impact all the assertions should be on in production builds. The
> > goal of assertions is to catch corruption quickly and that's something that's
> > just as important in production as it is in debugging.
>
> You seem not to have read the documentation:
Sure I have, I just disagree.
> I would bet that ninety percent of the Asserts in the existing code are on
> conditions that could represent, at worst, corruption of backend-local or
> even transaction-local data structures. Taking down the entire database
> cluster for that is not something that sounds like a stability-enhancing
> tradeoff to me.
It may be minor corruption or it may be that the reason for the minor
corruption comes from some larger bug. It may also be backend-local or
transaction-local corruption at the time the assert catches it but cause major
damage by the time it actually crashes a non-assert-enabled database.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mike Rylander | 2005-11-02 12:59:45 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-11-02 08:48:25 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mike Rylander | 2005-11-02 12:59:45 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-11-02 08:48:25 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |