X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E55DDA48D for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:07:25 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 62017-05 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:07:26 +0000 (GMT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from floppy.pyrenet.fr (news.pyrenet.fr [194.116.145.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3784DA1EC for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:07:22 -0400 (AST) Received: by floppy.pyrenet.fr (Postfix, from userid 106) id 2149331059; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:07:24 +0100 (MET) From: "Qingqing Zhou" X-Newsgroups: pgsql.hackers Subject: Re: [ADMIN] ERROR: could not read block Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:07:43 -0500 Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <437C6BE802000025000007B7@gwmta.wicourts.gov> <29369.1132249899@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none] X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/1079 X-Sequence-Number: 76361 "Tom Lane" wrote > > Would a simple retry loop actually help? It's not clear to me how > persistent such a failure would be. > [with reply to all followup threads] Yeah, this is the key and we definitely have no 100% guarantee that several retries will solve the problem - just as the situation in pg_unlink/pg_rename. But shall we do something now? If Kevin could help on testing(you may have to revert the registry changes :-() , I would like to send a patch in the retry style. Regards, Qingqing