On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: >> On 2014-11-17 10:21:04 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Andres, where are we with this patch? >>> >>> 1. You're going to commit it, but haven't gotten around to it yet. >>> >>> 2. You're going to modify it some more and repost, but haven't gotten >>> around to it yet. >>> >>> 3. You're willing to see it modified if somebody else does the work, >>> but are out of time to spend on it yourself. >>> >>> 4. Something else? >> >> I'm working on it. Amit had found a hang on PPC that I couldn't >> reproduce on x86. Since then I've reproduced it and I think yesterday I >> found the problem. Unfortunately it always took a couple hours to >> trigger... >> >> I've also made some, in my opinion, cleanups to the patch since >> then. Those have the nice side effect of making the size of struct >> LWLock smaller, but that wasn't actually the indended effect. >> >> I'll repost once I've verified the problem is fixed and I've updated all >> commentary. >> >> The current problem is that I seem to have found a problem that's also >> reproducible with master :(. After a couple of hours a >> pgbench -h /tmp -p 5440 scale3000 -M prepared -P 5 -c 180 -j 60 -T 20000 -S >> against a >> -c max_connections=200 -c shared_buffers=4GB >> cluster seems to hang on PPC. With all the backends waiting in buffer >> mapping locks. I'm now making sure it's really master and not my patch >> causing the problem - it's just not trivial with 180 processes involved. > > Ah, OK. Thanks for the update. Ping? This patch is in a stale state for a couple of weeks and still marked as waiting on author for this CF. -- Michael
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers