Re: tableam vs. TOAST - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Prabhat Sahu
Subject Re: tableam vs. TOAST
Date
Msg-id CANEvxPo4X4=dtEKpW0cy0HoQskPY6KmmXq6-g=zS0ADcQHLmbQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: tableam vs. TOAST  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: tableam vs. TOAST
List pgsql-hackers


On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:46 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 3:49 AM Prabhat Sahu <prabhat.sahu@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
While testing the Toast patch(PG+v7 patch) I found below server crash.
System configuration:
VCPUs: 4, RAM: 8GB, Storage: 320GB

This issue is not frequently reproducible, we need to repeat the same testcase multiple times.

I wonder if this is an independent bug, because the backtrace doesn't look like it's related to the stuff this is changing. Your report doesn't specify whether you can also reproduce the problem without the patch, which is something that you should always check before reporting a bug in a particular patch.
 
Hi Robert,

My sincere apologize that I have not mentioned the issue in more detail.
I have ran the same case against both PG HEAD and HEAD+Patch multiple times(7, 10, 20nos), and
as I found this issue was not failing in HEAD and same case is reproducible in HEAD+Patch (again I was not sure about the backtrace whether its related to patch or not).


 
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


--

With Regards,

Prabhat Kumar Sahu
Skype ID: prabhat.sahu1984
EnterpriseDB Software India Pvt. Ltd.

The Postgres Database Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Creating foreign key on partitioned table is too slow
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum