While testing this, I noticed another serious bug in the OldSerXidSLRU
handling: we never set the dirty-flag on any page. I believe the reason
we haven't bumped into this in testing before is that when a new page is
initialized, it's marked as dirty, so everything goes smoothly when we
modify
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
While testing this, I noticed another serious bug in the
OldSerXidSLRU handling: we never set the dirty-flag on any page.
Arg. I never noticed that there was such a thing, although in
retrospect I should have suspected it and gone hunting for it.
I believe the
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of jue jun 09 04:56:41 -0400 2011:
Fortunately the fix is very simple, we just need to set the page_dirty
flag whenever we modify an slru page. But clearly this slru stuff needs
more testing. It's pretty hard to write good repeatable test cases for
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of jue jun 09 04:56:41
-0400 2011:
Fortunately the fix is very simple, we just need to set the
page_dirty flag whenever we modify an slru page. But clearly this
slru stuff needs more testing. It's
On 08.06.2011 22:40, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 08.06.2011 03:28, Kevin Grittner wrote:
We had a report of the subject message during testing a while
back and attempted to address the issue. It can result in a LOG
level message
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I've committed your patch for now.
Thanks!
I don't see it yet on the public git repo, nor on the -commiters
list. I'll keep an eye out for it.
as far as I can see it's harmless except for the small waste of
disk space. We
On 09.06.2011 21:15, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I've committed your patch for now.
Thanks!
I don't see it yet on the public git repo, nor on the -commiters
list. I'll keep an eye out for it.
Oh, rats! Forgot to push.. Will do so
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I also fixed the broken warning logic. Please double-check that
too when you get a chance.
As usual, I like your code better than mine. I don't think my code
was broken in the sense that it would generate different results
than
On 08.06.2011 03:28, Kevin Grittner wrote:
We had a report of the subject message during testing a while back
and attempted to address the issue. It can result in a LOG level
message and the accumulation of files in the pg_serial SLRU
subdirectory. We haven't seen a recurrence, until I hit it
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 08.06.2011 03:28, Kevin Grittner wrote:
We had a report of the subject message during testing a while
back and attempted to address the issue. It can result in a LOG
level message and the accumulation of files in the pg_serial
We had a report of the subject message during testing a while back
and attempted to address the issue. It can result in a LOG level
message and the accumulation of files in the pg_serial SLRU
subdirectory. We haven't seen a recurrence, until I hit it during
testing of the just-posted patch for
11 matches
Mail list logo
