Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194-c826655850@github.com>
From: "bigfacewo (@bigfacewo)" <noreply+bigfacewo@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 09:07:43 +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: bigfacewo
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 826655850
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-826655850
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.

You are right! After configuration, the problem is solved temporarily