Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:18:32 -0400
From: Dan Ports <drkp@csail.mit.edu>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SSI bug?
Message-ID: <20110318181832.GB72629@csail.mit.edu>
References: <20110221234236.4635E19D574@mail.netbsd.org>
	<20110221234236.4635E19D574@mail.netbsd.org>
	<20110318022622.196E519CFCA@mail.netbsd.org>
	<4D835508020000250003BAD2@gw.wicourts.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D835508020000250003BAD2@gw.wicourts.gov>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)


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/