Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1wb3QnV8g9fBCGFDWg4OF-FULmRmKm+yK3odQtQrA2z=A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
On 2015-07-29 09:23:32 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've reproduced it again against commit b2ed8edeecd715c8a23ae462.
>
> It took 5 hours on a 8 core "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650".
>
> I also reproduced it in 3 hours on the same machine with both JJ_torn_page
> and JJ_xid set to zero (i.e. turned off, no induced crashes), so the
> fault-injection patch should not be necessary to get the issue..

Hm, that's a single socket or dual socket E5-2650 system? That CPU
itself has 8 cores, and can work in a dual socket system, that's why I
ask.

It is a virtual machine, and I think a property of the VM software is that any given virtual machine can only run on one socket of the underlying hardware.  The real machine is dual socket, though.

Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Supporting TAP tests with MSVC and Windows