Re: CLOG contention, part 2

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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?