Re: Posix Shared Mem patch
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Posix Shared Mem patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobT1jyX7v3AH9P0+eOdPsCMt+bwhbqQK7c8W0BBoGNP6w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Posix Shared Mem patch (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Posix Shared Mem patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > On 64-bit Linux, if I allocate more shared buffers than the system is > capable of reserving, it doesn't start. This is expected, but there's > no error logged anywhere (actually, nothing logged at all), and the > postmaster.pid file is left behind after this failure. Fixed. However, I discovered something unpleasant. With the new code, on MacOS X, if you set shared_buffers to say 3200GB, the server happily starts up. Or at least the shared memory allocation goes through just fine. The postmaster then sits there apparently forever without emitting any log messages, which I eventually discovered was because it's busy initializing a billion or so spinlocks. I'm pretty sure that this machine does not have >3TB of virtual memory, even counting swap. So that means that MacOS X has absolutely no common sense whatsoever as far as anonymous shared memory allocations go. Not sure exactly what to do about that. Linux is more sensible, at least on the system I tested, and fails cleanly. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: