Re: BUG #15041: dsa alloc_object null pointer
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15041: dsa alloc_object null pointer |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEepm=2SicfYv7_2+qxMfXPfkKNJFhc9J_xuCqc5Rgb6tQpmdw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #15041: dsa alloc_object null pointer (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #15041: dsa alloc_object null pointer
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 8:48 AM, PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote: > The following bug has been logged on the website: > > Bug reference: 15041 > Logged by: Daniel Farina > Email address: daniel@fdr.io > PostgreSQL version: 10.1 > Operating system: Linux > Description: > > A database that was operating normally for quite a while suddenly generated > three similar looking core-dumps near one another. The stack traces look > like this. > > It is possible there was unusual memory pressure, at the time this occurred. > This is the first occurrence. > > #0 alloc_object (size_class=<optimized out>, area=0x0) at dsa.c:1433 > #1 dsa_allocate_extended (area=0x0, size=size@entry=72, > flags=flags@entry=4) at dsa.c:785 > #2 0x000000000062d277 in tbm_prepare_shared_iterate > (tbm=tbm@entry=0x1e54160) at tidbitmap.c:807 > #3 0x00000000005f69a0 in BitmapHeapNext (node=node@entry=0x1d22a48) at > nodeBitmapHeapscan.c:155 Hi Daniel, Thanks for the report. This looks like the bug described here, where "area" is a NULL pointer because we failed to launch a parallel query (ie we're running a parallel query plan, but there are no workers and no shared memory): https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEepm=0kADK5inNf_KuemjX=HQ=PuTP0DykM--fO5jS5ePVFEA@mail.gmail.com It was fixed in commit c6755e233be1cccadd0884d952a2bb455fa0db1f and back patched to REL_10_STABLE, so the fix will be in 10.2 (target 8th Feb). The cause is running out of DSM slots, but not handing that case correctly. I think this implies that you're running queries with a lot of Gather [Merge] nodes in them? The number of DSM slots is 64 + 2 * max_connections, so one workaround is to crank up max_connections, and another is just to disable parallelism for that query. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: