From: Dan Ports <drkp@csail.mit.edu>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SSI bug?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:18:32 -0400
Message-ID: <20110318181832.GB72629@csail.mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D835508020000250003BAD2@gw.wicourts.gov>
References: <20110221234236.4635E19D574@mail.netbsd.org>
<20110221234236.4635E19D574@mail.netbsd.org>
<20110318022622.196E519CFCA@mail.netbsd.org>
<4D835508020000250003BAD2@gw.wicourts.gov>
It would probably also be worth monitoring the size of pg_locks to see
how many predicate locks are being held.
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:50:16PM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Even with the above information it may be far from clear where
> allocations are going past their maximum, since one HTAB could grab
> more than its share and starve another which is staying below its
> "maximum". I'll take a look at the possibility of adding a warning
> or some such when an HTAB expands past its maximum size.
Yes -- considering how few shared memory HTABs have sizes that are
really dynamic, I'd be inclined to take a close look at SSI and
max_predicate_locks_per_transaction regardless of where the failed
allocation took place. But I am surprised to see that error message
without SSI's hint about increasing max_predicate_locks_per_xact.
Dan
--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/
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: drkp@csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: SSI bug?
In-Reply-To: <20110318181832.GB72629@csail.mit.edu>
* 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