Re: [HACKERS] Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum
От | daveg |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20110302235354.GP26397@sonic.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set
happend during repeatable vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-admin |
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 06:45:13PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from daveg's message of mié mar 02 18:30:34 -0300 2011: > > > After a restart and vacuum of all dbs with no other activity things were > > quiet for a couple hours and then we started seeing these PD_ALL_VISIBLE > > messages again. > > > > Going back through the logs we have been getting these since at least before > > mid January. Oddly, this only happens on four systems which are all new Dell > > 32 core Nehalem 512GB machines using iscsi partitions served off a Netapp. > > Our older 8 core 64GB hosts have never logged any of these errors. I'm not > > saying it is related to the hw, as these hosts are doing a lot more work than > > the old hosts so it may be a concurrency problem that just never came up at > > lower levels before. > > > > Postgresql version is 8.4.4. > > I don't see how this could be related, but since you're running on NFS, > maybe it is, somehow: > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D40DDB7.1010000@credativ.com > (for example what if the visibility map fork's last page is overwritten?) Running on ISCSI, not nfs. But it is still a Netapp, so who knows. I'll look. Also, we are not seeing any of the "unexpected data beyond EOF" errors, just thousands per day of the PD_ALL_VISIBLE error. -dg -- David Gould daveg@sonic.net 510 536 1443 510 282 0869 If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: