Re: Lock partitions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Lock partitions
Date
Msg-id 28122.1161191921@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Lock partitions  (Mark Wong <markw@osdl.org>)
Responses Re: Lock partitions  (Mark Wong <markw@osdl.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Mark Wong <markw@osdl.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm, what sort of errors are we talking about?

> ERROR:  too many LWLocks taken

That really shouldn't happen ... are you sure you did a full recompile
after changing NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS?

Actually ... wait a moment.  The default value of NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS
is already 16 (1 << LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS where the latter is 4).
Are you saying you set LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS to 16?  That would be
way too many partitions.  I was thinking of testing
LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS in the range of about 2 to 5.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 8.1.5 is out
Next
From: Mark Wong
Date:
Subject: Re: Lock partitions