On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 07:57:13PM -0700, daveg wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:41:07AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > daveg escribió: > > > > > I work with Kunal and have been looking into this. It appears to be the > > > same > > > as the bug described in: > > > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-09/msg00355.php > > > > > > as I have localized it to a NULL pointer deference in > > > RelationCacheInitializePhase2() as well. Tom speculates in: > > > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-09/msg00372.php > > > > > > that large numbers of table drops might trigger this. The system in > > > question > > > creates and drops temp tables at a high rate which tends to confirm this. > > > > Did you test the patch posted by Tom? > > We are testing it since last night in our test environment. If it does not > break anything (unlikely) we will deploy it next week. However, since the > problem is only occasional, only happens every few days on one of 50+ hosts, > it will take some extended time without further segfaults to say anything > confident about the patches effectiveness.
We have had this deployed in our test and production environments for a couple weeks now. We have not seen any further instance of the problem. Without the patch, we would have expected to see at least a few by now. So the patch appears to be effective. -dg -- David Gould da...@sonic.net 510 536 1443 510 282 0869 If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
