Hi Jeff
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:04 AM, David Whittaker wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a
>> year now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at the
>> cause. At
Hi Ken,
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:33 AM, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:04:21AM -0400, David Whittaker wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a
> year
> > now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:04 AM, David Whittaker wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a
> year now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at the
> cause. At what seem like fairly random intervals Postgres will become
> unrespo
Hi Andrew,
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/10/2013 11:04 AM, David Whittaker wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a
>> year now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at the
>> cause.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:04:21AM -0400, David Whittaker wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a year
> now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at the cause.
> At what seem like fairly random intervals Postgres will become u
On 09/10/2013 11:04 AM, David Whittaker wrote:
Hi All,
I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a
year now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at
the cause. At what seem like fairly random intervals Postgres will
become unresponsive to the 3
Hi All,
I've been seeing a strange issue with our Postgres install for about a year
now, and I was hoping someone might be able to help point me at the cause.
At what seem like fairly random intervals Postgres will become unresponsive
to the 3 application nodes it services. These periods tend to l
On 09/10/2013 09:23 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-09-10 15:21:33 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
If I interpret things correctly you're using serializable? I guess there
is no chance to use repeatable read instead?
Err, that wouldn't help much. Read committed. That lets PGXACT->xmin advance
the
On 2013-09-10 15:21:33 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> If I interpret things correctly you're using serializable? I guess there
> is no chance to use repeatable read instead?
Err, that wouldn't help much. Read committed. That lets PGXACT->xmin advance
these days and thus might help to reduce the imp
On 2013-09-10 08:45:33 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/10/2013 08:20 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> >A backtrace for this would be useful. Alternatively you could recompile
> >postgres using -fno-omit-frame-pointer in CFLAGS and use perf record -g.
>
> It's using a custom build, so this sho
On 09/10/2013 08:20 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
A backtrace for this would be useful. Alternatively you could recompile
postgres using -fno-omit-frame-pointer in CFLAGS and use perf record -g.
It's using a custom build, so this should be doable.
Any chance you have older prepared xacts, older
Hi,
On 2013-09-09 20:38:09 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 08/01/2013 03:20 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >>Amit, All:
> >>
> >>So we just retested this on 9.3b2. The performance is the same as 9.1
> >>and 9.2; that is, progressively worse as
On 2013-09-09 20:38:09 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 08/01/2013 03:20 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >>Amit, All:
> >>
> >>So we just retested this on 9.3b2. The performance is the same as 9.1
> >>and 9.2; that is, progressively worse as the
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 05:43:16AM +, Mel Llaguno wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> First of all, I'd like to thank you for taking some interest in this
> issue. We'd love to migrate to the latest PG version, but this issue
> is currently preventing us from doing so.
>
> Regardless of the DB used (base appli
14 matches
Mail list logo
