From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: danger of stats_temp_directory = /dev/shm |
Date: | 2013-08-19 19:36:26 |
Message-ID: | 20130819193626.GE26775@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-08-19 15:25:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Hm. Is a check like that actually sufficient? The idea of setting
> > stats_temp_directory to /dev/shm/postgres or similar in all of several
> > clusters on one machine doesn't seem to be that far fetched.
>
> Hm. We could fairly easily have the lockfile management code also
> write a postmaster.pid file into the stats_temp_directory, thus claiming
> it in the same way as we do the $PGDATA dir itself. Not sure it's worth
> the trouble though, since we've not heard any field reports of this sort
> of thing.
The reason I think it's more likely is that pg_stats_directory, to be
useful, really needs something like a ramdisk/tmpfs. Which is annoying
to create in a persistent fashion...
Very likely doing so would cause hard to diagnose planner issues using
completely absurd statistics. Not sure how often it would get properly
diagnosed.
But:
> Maybe we're overreacting to this issue for stats_temp_directory,
> and tightening up the deletion code is a sufficient fix.
You very well might be right. Just wanted to raise the issue.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jon Nelson | 2013-08-19 19:40:07 | Re: 9.4 regression |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-08-19 19:25:38 | Re: danger of stats_temp_directory = /dev/shm |