Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194-c661500135@github.com>
From: "oobles (@oobles)" <noreply+oobles@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 00:45:14 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #194: PgJDBC can experience client/server deadlocks during batch execution
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: oobles
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 661500135
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 194
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/194#issuecomment-661500135
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

We've found that reducing the batch size avoids the behaviour. In addition, we made sure the operating system TCP configuration have larger allocated buffers. e.g.

net.core.rmem_max = 134217728 
net.core.wmem_max = 134217728 
net.core.rmem_default = 134217728
net.core.wmem_default = 134217728
net.ipv4.tcp_mem = 18569037 24758719 37138074
net.ipv4.tcp_rmem= 10240 87380 134217728
net.ipv4.tcp_wmem= 10240 87380 134217728

This is really just fiddling around the edges and trying to second guess the behaviour. It isn't a solution.