On Sunday 12 March 2006 09:40, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > If so, > > > we could perhaps recode that part using a Mutex instead of > > > > a critical > > > > > section - since it's not a performance critical path, the > > > > difference > > > > > shouldn't be large. If I code up a patch for that, can you re-apply > > > SP1 and test it? Or is this a production system you can't > > > > really touch? > > > > I can do whatever the hell I want with it, so if you could > > cook up a patch that would be great. > > > > As a BTW: I reinstalled SP1 and turned stats collection off. > > That also seems to work, but is not really a solution since > > we want to use autovacuuming. > > Ok, I've coded up a patch that changes the code to use a mutex instead. > Patch attached. You can get a precompiled postgres.exe at > http://www.hagander.net/download/postgres.exe_mutex.zip. You need to > copy this file to postmaster.exe as well - they are supposed to be > identical. It's based off a snapshot of 8.1-stable. > > Looking a my system while testing this it still loooked like it was > hanging on that plac ein the code, even though I saw no problems. So I'm > not convinced we can actually trust the stacktrace from the non-default > threads. So I don't think this patch will actually work :-( But it's > worth a try. > > (Oh, and I moved the thread over to -hackers, seems more correct at this > time)
Thanks Magnus, I'll try tomorrow. Will let you know ASAP (8:30 EST I guess :). If this doesn't work, how do we progress? > > //Magnus jan -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Jan de Visser [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu! -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
