Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is this something that can be fixed for 8.0.4? > Fixed in 8.0, 7.4 and 7.3 branches. Excellent news. Thanks. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Teodor Sigaev
We have queries that use ltree for sorting too, the sort looks like this: order by subpath(ltreefield, 0, nlevel(ltreefield) - 1) But concurrency leads to a bug, that results in an sql-error: ERROR: invalid positions contrib_regression=# select nlevel(t), subpath(t, 0, nlevel(t)-1) from te

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Mario Weilguni
Am Dienstag, 30. August 2005 12:19 schrieb Teodor Sigaev: > > Since 7.4 we have troubles with ltree (seldom corruption of buffer cache, > > not on-disk), might this bug be somehow related to the ltree problem? 7.2 > > was rock-stable with ltree. > > Not sure. Fixed bug was (@ - contains operation):

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Since 7.4 we have troubles with ltree (seldom corruption of buffer cache, not on-disk), might this bug be somehow related to the ltree problem? 7.2 was rock-stable with ltree. Not sure. Fixed bug was (@ - contains operation): update wow set a = a || '{101}'::int[] where a @ '{1,2,3}'; select a

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Mario Weilguni
Am Dienstag, 30. August 2005 11:25 schrieb Teodor Sigaev: > Fixed in 8.0, 7.4 and 7.3 branches. > > Tom Lane wrote: > > Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.pl > >>http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.sh > > > > BTW, these scripts seem to indicate that there's

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-30 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Fixed in 8.0, 7.4 and 7.3 branches. Tom Lane wrote: Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.pl http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.sh BTW, these scripts seem to indicate that there's a GIST or contrib/intarray problem in the 8.0 branch. I was trying to use '

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-26 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Finded problem in GiST isn't too simple to resolve. I'm working on it. The problem is about update query... Tom Lane wrote: Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.pl http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.sh BTW, these scripts seem to indicate that there's a G

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-26 Thread Hannu Krosing
On R, 2005-08-26 at 16:47 +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-08/msg00304.php > > > > Could you perhaps test this patch as well, while you already have a > > setup for testing parallel vacuums under big loads ? > > I didn't find any problem with your

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-26 Thread Teodor Sigaev
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-08/msg00304.php Could you perhaps test this patch as well, while you already have a setup for testing parallel vacuums under big loads ? I didn't find any problem with your patch during testing with 1e8 statements... -- Teodor Sigaev

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-25 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.pl > http://www.sigaev.ru/gist/concur.sh BTW, these scripts seem to indicate that there's a GIST or contrib/intarray problem in the 8.0 branch. I was trying to use 'em to test REL8_0_STABLE branch tip to verify my t_ctid

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-25 Thread Teodor Sigaev
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-08/msg00304.php Could you perhaps test this patch as well, while you already have a setup for testing parallel vacuums under big loads ? Ok, I'll do it. Or perhaps you can share the setup/scripts/data so that I could run your test myself as w

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-24 Thread Hannu Krosing
On K, 2005-08-24 at 15:52 +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > > Further I'm going to increase concurrency up to 12 parallel threads. > > All is ok, test is passed with approximatly 40 millions statements > I have sent a patch to patches list enabling concurrent vacuums to actually reclaim space while

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-24 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Further I'm going to increase concurrency up to 12 parallel threads. All is ok, test is passed with approximatly 40 millions statements -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/ --

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-23 Thread Teodor Sigaev
I have committed changes that I believe fix this problem: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2005-08/msg00213.php But it needs more testing. Would you update to CVS tip and see if you still see the failure? It seems, patch works correctly. My tests is passed with approximatly 1e8 S

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-22 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I've written some quick scripts. One just vacuums constantly (999 vacuums > > to 1 vacuum full) while three other scripts three randomly insert > > into, update and delete from 3 tables. There's a mix of small and

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-22 Thread Teodor Sigaev
In other words ... if you can test this ... HELP!!! I'll run tests. -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/ ---(end of broadcast)---

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-20 Thread Tom Lane
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've written some quick scripts. One just vacuums constantly (999 vacuums > to 1 vacuum full) while three other scripts three randomly insert > into, update and delete from 3 tables. There's a mix of small and large > transactions. The tables have a single

Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-20 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > I have committed changes that I believe fix this problem: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2005-08/msg00213.php > But it needs more testing. Would you update to CVS tip and see if you > still see the failure? I've written some quick scripts

VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited)

2005-08-19 Thread Tom Lane
Awhile back, Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And there is one more problem: it caused approximatly one time per 2-4 > million > statements, I got traps: > TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((*curpage)->offsets_used == num_tuples)", File: > "vacuum.c", Line: 2766) > LOG: server process (PID 158

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-07-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > I think the whole GiST limitations page can be removed now... > > http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/limitations.html Done. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-29 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Sorry, fixed. Qingqing Zhou wrote: "Teodor Sigaev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes concur.pl - generator of SQL statements retrieving it is forbidden ... Regards, Qingqing ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-29 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Teodor Sigaev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > concur.pl - generator of SQL statements retrieving it is forbidden ... Regards, Qingqing ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-29 Thread Teodor Sigaev
And there is one more problem: it caused approximatly one time per 2-4 million statements, I got traps: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((*curpage)->offsets_used == num_tuples)", File: "vacuum.c", Line: 2766) LOG: server process (PID 15847) was terminated by signal 6 Odd. Will look at it later (aft

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-27 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I think the whole GiST limitations page can be removed now... http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/limitations.html Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an inde

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-27 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While I'm running test with concurrent > select/insert/update/delete/vacuum/vacuum full I found, that sometimes > postgres crashes in index_beginscan_internal on FunctionCall3, because > structure 'procedure' becomes zeroed. As I understand, LockRelation

[HACKERS] GiST concurrency commited

2005-06-27 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Have we list named something like 'test focusing for 8.1'? If it exists then GiST concurrency and recovery testing should be added to it. Especially, recovery after crash. Of course, now Oleg and me going to begin a large test program. While I'm running test with concurrent select/insert/upda

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency

2005-06-21 Thread Teodor Sigaev
If the method needs a truly global LSN, then it is broken --- the only way you could have such a value and have it stay good long enough to do anything with it is to block all other backends from inserting any new WAL records. Which is the very antithesis of concurrency. Global LSN needs to reco

Re: [HACKERS] GiST concurrency

2005-06-21 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now I basically finished recovery for GiST (of course, it's need a hard > testing) > and go to concurrency. As it described in Kornaker, Mohan and Hellerstein's > paper > (http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/papers/concurrency/sigmod97-gist.pd

[HACKERS] GiST concurrency

2005-06-21 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Now I basically finished recovery for GiST (of course, it's need a hard testing) and go to concurrency. As it described in Kornaker, Mohan and Hellerstein's paper (http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/papers/concurrency/sigmod97-gist.pdf) it's need a way to get global LSN, in our case -

[HACKERS] GiST concurrency and recovery for 8.1

2005-06-07 Thread Oleg Bartunov
Hi there, I want to inform that we began to work on concurrency and recovery support in GiST on our's own account and hope to be ready before 8.1 code freeze. There was some noise about possible sponsoring of our work, but we didn't get any offering yet, so we're looking for sponsorhip ! We re