Re: Priority table or Cache table
От | Sameer Thakur |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Priority table or Cache table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1400236141628-5804200.post@n5.nabble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Priority table or Cache table (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Priority table or Cache table
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, I applied the patch to current HEAD. There was one failure (attached), freelist.rej <http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/file/n5804200/freelist.rej> Compiled the provided pgbench.c and added following in .conf shared_buffers = 128MB # min 128kB Shared_buffers=64MB Priority_buffers=128MB I was planning to performance test later hence different values. But while executing pgbench the following assertion occurs LOG: database system is ready to accept connections LOG: autovacuum launcher started TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(strategy_delta >= 0)", File: "bufmgr.c", Line: 1435) LOG: background writer process (PID 10274) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted LOG: terminating any other active server processes WARNING: terminating connection because of crash of another server process DETAIL: The postmaster has commanded this server process to roll back the current transaction and exit, because another server process exited abnormally and possibly corrupted shared memory. Is there a way to avoid it? Am i making some mistake? regards Sameer -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Priority-table-or-Cache-table-tp5792831p5804200.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: