From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: CLOG contention, part 2 |
Date: | 2012-01-21 15:31:21 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMLm7F9M1q4zkRCs3Zxhsdqd-nBKd9mpXL2pYrzHawpT2w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> D'oh. You're right. Looks like I accidentally tried to apply this to
>>>> the 9.1 sources. Sigh...
>>>
>>> No worries. It's Friday.
>
> Server passed 'make check' with this patch, but when I tried to fire
> it up for some test runs, it fell over with:
>
> FATAL: no more LWLockIds available
>
> I assume that it must be dependent on the config settings used. Here are mine:
>
> shared_buffers = 8GB
> maintenance_work_mem = 1GB
> synchronous_commit = off
> checkpoint_segments = 300
> checkpoint_timeout = 15min
> checkpoint_completion_target = 0.9
> wal_writer_delay = 20ms
Yes, it was. Sorry about that. New version attached, retesting while
you read this.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
clog_history.v2.patch | text/x-patch | 7.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Euler Taveira de Oliveira | 2012-01-21 16:13:41 | Re: xlog location arithmetic |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-01-21 15:11:04 | Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY? |