Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)",) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)",)
Date
Msg-id 20051031234731.GQ20349@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)",)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)",)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Now that I've got a little better idea of what this code does, I've
noticed something interesting... this issue is happening on an 8-way
machine, and NUM_SLRU_BUFFERS is currently defined at 8. Doesn't this
greatly increase the odds of buffer conflicts? Bug aside, would it be
better to set NUM_SLRU_BUFFERS higher for a larger number of CPUs?

Also, something else to note is that this database can see a pretty high
transaction rate... I just checked and it was doing 200TPS, but iirc it
can hit 1000+ TPS during the day.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 8.1 Release Candidate 1 Coming ...
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)",)