After some observation of massive reindexing of some hundred thousand
data sets it seems to me that the slave doesn't skip checkpoints
anymore. (Apart from those skipped because of the CheckpointTimeout thing)
I'll keep an eye on it and report back any news on the issue.
Nice, committed. Thank f
After some observation of massive reindexing of some hundred thousand
data sets it seems to me that the slave doesn't skip checkpoints
anymore. (Apart from those skipped because of the CheckpointTimeout thing)
I'll keep an eye on it and report back any news on the issue.
Thank you for the good wor
Ooops. Patch doesn't apply cleanly. New version.
Attached patch fixes that deadlock bug too. And, previous version of my
patch has a mistake which is observable on CREATE INDEX .. USING GIN query.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. After a certain point, consecutive GIN index splits cause a problem.
The new RHS block numbers are consecutive from 111780+
That's newly created page. Splitted page might have any number
2. The incomplete splits stay around indefinitely after creation and we
aren't trying to remove the wron
<2007-06-01 23:00:00.001 CEST:%> LOG: GIN incomplete splits=8
Just to be sure: patch fixes *creating* of WAL log, not replaying. So, primary
db should be patched too.
During weekend I found possible deadlock in locking protocol in GIN between
concurrent UPDATE and VACUUM queries with the sa
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 23:14 +0200, Frank Wittig wrote:
> Teodor Sigaev schrieb:
> > Hope, attached patch fix that. Pls, test it.
>
> It still happens.
> The log is full of incomplete split dumps:
>
> <2007-06-01 23:00:00.001 CEST:%> LOG: GIN incomplete splits=8
> <2007-06-01 23:00:00.001 CEST:%>
Teodor Sigaev schrieb:
> Hope, attached patch fix that. Pls, test it.
It still happens.
The log is full of incomplete split dumps:
<2007-06-01 23:00:00.001 CEST:%> LOG: GIN incomplete splits=8
<2007-06-01 23:00:00.001 CEST:%> CONTEXT: xlog redo checkpoint: redo
D0/28020F48; undo 0/0; tli 1; xid
Hi Teodor,
Teodor Sigaev schrieb:
> Hope, attached patch fix that. Pls, test it.
The patch is running. I'll keep on reporting.
Have a nice weekend.
Greetings,
Frank Wittig
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 22:42 +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> Found a reason: if parent page is fully backuped after child's split then
> forgetIncompleteSplit() isn't called at all.
i.e. full_page_writes = on
> Hope, attached patch fix that. Pls, test it.
>
> PS I'm going away for weekend, so I'll
Found a reason: if parent page is fully backuped after child's split then
forgetIncompleteSplit() isn't called at all.
Hope, attached patch fix that. Pls, test it.
PS I'm going away for weekend, so I'll not be online until Monday.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 20:49 +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> > I'd suggest we throw an error, as shown in the enclosed patch. Frank,
> > can you give that a whirl to provide Teodor with something more to work
> > with? Thanks.
>
> I already makes a test suite which reproduce the problem - it leaves
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 09:22 -0700, Dhaval Shah wrote:
> I am following this thread with interest and hence as a request if the
> discussion is kept in this thread, is easier for me to follow it.
>
> Just recently I have put the WAL standby in production using 8.2.3 and
> would like to know the cir
I'd suggest we throw an error, as shown in the enclosed patch. Frank,
can you give that a whirl to provide Teodor with something more to work
with? Thanks.
I already makes a test suite which reproduce the problem - it leaves incompleted
splits. But I discover one more problem: deadlock on buf
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 19:11 +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> > <2007-06-01 16:28:51.708 CEST:%> LOG: GIN incomplete split root:8
> > l:45303 r:111740 at redo CA/C8243C28
> ...
> > <2007-06-01 16:38:23.133 CEST:%> LOG: GIN incomplete split root:8
> > l:45303 r:111740 at redo CA/C8243C28
>
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
