Regards, Neha Sharma On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 20 July 2017 at 15:00, Neha Sharma <neha.sha...@enterprisedb.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Craig, >> >> I had done a fresh initdb,the default parameter configuration was used. I >> was setting few set of parameters while startup by the below command. >> >> ./postgres -d postgres -c shared_buffers=$shared_bufs -N 200 -c >> min_wal_size=15GB -c max_wal_size=20GB -c checkpoint_timeout=900 -c >> maintenance_work_mem=1GB -c checkpoint_completion_target=0.9 & >> >> Now I have modified the script a bit with Robert's suggestion as below. >> Instead of starting it with postgres binary i have set it in conf file and >> starting the server with pg_ctl. I am waiting for the results,once the core >> dump is generated will share the details. >> > > Thanks. > > To verify that you do get a coredump, you might want to consider sending a > kill -SEGV to a backend and make sure that it actually dumps core and you > can find the core. > > Ideally you'd actually set the coredumps to include shmem (see > coredump_filter in http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man5/core.5.html), but > with 8GB shared_buffers that may not be practical. It'd be very useful if > possible. > > If this is wraparound-related, as it appears to be, you might get faster > results by using a custom pgbench script for one or more workers that just > runs txid_current() a whole lot. Or jump the server's xid space forward. > Thanks. Will put together suggestions to get the result. > > I've got a few other things on right now but I'll keep an eye out and hope > for a core dump. > > -- > Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services >
