pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: OK, so culicidae is *still* broken
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:07:13 -0400
Message-ID: <15162.1493129233@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMsr+YG==sYy6sHkgc_q3ahcuPMGfQRhpU2-V114VCCynSSUCg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4180.1492292046@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAA4eK1KCbLtpG1qPMCN2orHsHhxkrL+UL9amZBeRfJ6XeA3iPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<6309.1492611331@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20170419153151.y5bfp4kdo377ycps@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CAA4eK1LFuxqWg8Jo5yjjn9rneG748Hb8V_HRmi+C0j7fp18qFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20170420192500.gaagaaopc2kjmort@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CAA4eK1JA01c_K7hkLc0Ftxba63iSh_1o7n8gqaFG0SZTkd_gOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMsr+YH9qEJ7U8Fmv+K9BbFxd34Trd64MoaKT8iKMQYobd_nHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20170424180848.gxaw44jwag7doqz5@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<1784.1493059391@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20170424185029.xm5yjkrifajcmmco@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<bec16500-e944-f438-c277-7176b5c53a70@iki.fi>
	<CAMsr+YGheQvzySZ-DGCLU_qU_yf4NGpCkbiVt_nv5OvcSa5U_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMsr+YG==sYy6sHkgc_q3ahcuPMGfQRhpU2-V114VCCynSSUCg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 25 Apr. 2017 13:37, "Heikki Linnakangas" <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>> For some data shared memory structures, that store no pointers, we wouldn't
>> need to insist that they are mapped to the same address in every backend,
>> though. In particular, shared_buffers. It wouldn't eliminate the problem,
>> though, only make it less likely, so we'd still need to retry when it does
>> happen.

> Good point. Simply splitting out shared_buffers into a moveable segment
> would make a massive difference. Much less chance of losing the dice roll
> for mapping the fixed segment.

> Should look at what else could be made cheaply relocatable too.

I don't think it's worth spending any effort on.  We need the retry
code anyway, and making it near impossible to hit that would only mean
that it's very poorly tested.  The results upthread say that it isn't
going to be hit often enough to be a performance problem, so why worry?

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (35+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <15162.1493129233@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../15162.1493129233@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/15162.1493129233@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, craig@2ndquadrant.com, hlinnaka@iki.fi, andres@anarazel.de, amit.kapila16@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: OK, so culicidae is *still* broken
  In-Reply-To: <15162.1493129233@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox