On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 9:59 AM John Naylor wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:25 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Here's an updated patch based on comments by you. I will proceed with
> > this unless you have any more comments.
>
> Looks good to me. I would just adjust the grammar in the commen
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:25 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Here's an updated patch based on comments by you. I will proceed with
> this unless you have any more comments.
Looks good to me. I would just adjust the grammar in the comment, from
"This prevents us to use the map", to "This prevents us f
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 8:10 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 7:45 AM John Naylor
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 7:24 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > The flaw in my thinking was treating extension too similarly too
> > > > finding an existing block. With your patch clea
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 7:45 AM John Naylor wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 7:24 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > The flaw in my thinking was treating extension too similarly too
> > > finding an existing block. With your patch clearing the local map in
> > > the correct place, it seems the call at
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 7:24 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > The flaw in my thinking was treating extension too similarly too
> > finding an existing block. With your patch clearing the local map in
> > the correct place, it seems the call at hio.c:682 is now superfluous?
>
> What if get some valid bloc
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:07 AM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:06 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I have tried this test many times (more than 1000 times) by varying
> > thread count, but couldn't reproduce it. My colleague, Kuntal has
> > tried a similar test overnight, but the iss
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:06 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> I have tried this test many times (more than 1000 times) by varying
> thread count, but couldn't reproduce it. My colleague, Kuntal has
> tried a similar test overnight, but the issue didn't reproduce which
> is not surprising to me seeing the
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:28 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> John, others, can you review my findings and patch?
I can confirm your findings with your debugging steps. Nice work!
--
John Naylorhttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Ser
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:32 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
>
> To fix this symptom, we can ensure that once we didn't get any block
> from local map, we must clear it. See the attached patch. I will try
> to evaluate this code path to see if ther
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:32 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations, take 2.
>
> I think this patch still has some issues. Note the following two
> recent buildfarm failures:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:38 AM John Naylor wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I will look into it today and respond back with my findings. John,
> > see if you also get time to investigate this.
>
> Will do, but it will likely be tomorrow
>
No problem, thanks!
-
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:14 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> > Amit Kapila writes:
> >> Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations, take 2.
>
> > I think this patch still has some issues.
>
> Just out of curiosity ... how can it possibly be even a little bit sane
> that fsm_
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> I will look into it today and respond back with my findings. John,
> see if you also get time to investigate this.
Will do, but it will likely be tomorrow
--
John Naylorhttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:32 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations, take 2.
>
> I think this patch still has some issues.
>
I will look into it today and respond back with my findings. John,
see if you also get time to inve
I wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
>> Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations, take 2.
> I think this patch still has some issues.
Just out of curiosity ... how can it possibly be even a little bit sane
that fsm_local_map is a single static data structure, without even any
indi
Amit Kapila writes:
> Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations, take 2.
I think this patch still has some issues. Note the following two
recent buildfarm failures:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=petalura&dt=2019-02-20%2004%3A20%3A01
https://buildfar
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 07:20:29AM +0100, John Naylor wrote:
> That particular test could be removed -- it's just verifying behavior
> that's already been there for years and is a direct consquence of
> normal truncation combined with the addressing scheme of the FSM
> logic.
Moved to next CF, ple
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:58 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 11:10 AM Andrew Gierth
> you just need to create free space on a page that didn't have enough
> > before? It might be worth tweaking the fillfactor rather than trying to
> > delete anything.
> >
>
> No, it also depends
Amit Kapila writes:
>> I don't know what the common thread is here, but you don't get to leave
>> the buildfarm broken this badly while you figure it out.
> Sure, but I am wondering why none of this ever shown in local tests,
> as we have done quite some testing related to pgbench as well.
Not s
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 11:10 AM Andrew Gierth
wrote:
>
> > "Amit" == Amit Kapila writes:
>
> Amit> Yes, so this could be the cause of the problem. I think we need
> Amit> to change the tests added by the patch such that they don't rely
> Amit> on vacuum to remove dead-row versions? Do you
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 11:18 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > Yes, so this could be the cause of the problem. I think we need to
> > change the tests added by the patch such that they don't rely on
> > vacuum to remove dead-row versions? Do you or anybody else see any
> > better
Amit Kapila writes:
> Yes, so this could be the cause of the problem. I think we need to
> change the tests added by the patch such that they don't rely on
> vacuum to remove dead-row versions? Do you or anybody else see any
> better way to fix this?
To be blunt, this patch needs to be reverted
> "Amit" == Amit Kapila writes:
Amit> Yes, so this could be the cause of the problem. I think we need
Amit> to change the tests added by the patch such that they don't rely
Amit> on vacuum to remove dead-row versions? Do you or anybody else see
Amit> any better way to fix this?
Do you ju
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:25 AM Andrew Gierth
wrote:
>
> > "Amit" == Amit Kapila writes:
>
> Amit> One possibility is that autovacuum has triggered to perform
> Amit> truncation of some other relation (remove pages at the end) which
> Amit> doesn't allow the FSM test to remove the rows/pe
> "Amit" == Amit Kapila writes:
Amit> One possibility is that autovacuum has triggered to perform
Amit> truncation of some other relation (remove pages at the end) which
Amit> doesn't allow the FSM test to remove the rows/perform truncation
Amit> and thus let to the failure. Can there be
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 8:49 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 8:17 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Avoid creation of the free space map for small heap relations.
> >
>
> It seems there is some failure due to this on build farm machines. I
> will investigate!
>
The failure is as be
26 matches
Mail list logo