I'm using 10.4 with no issues. One or two of the recommended settings for MCF have changed between 9.6 and 10. Simple to resolve though. Steph
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Karl Wright <daddy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Guy, > > I use Postgresql 9.6 myself and have found no issues with it. I don't > know about v 10 however. > > Karl > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 11:32 AM Standen Guy <guy.stan...@uk.fujitsu.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Karl/All, >> >> I am upgrading from MCF v2.6 supported by PostgreSQL v >> 9.3.16 to MCF v2.10. I wonder if there is any official advice as to >> which version of PostgreSQL will support MCF v2.10? The MCF v2.10 build >> and deployment instructions still suggest that PostgreSQL 9.3 is the latest >> tested version of PostgreSQL. Given that PostgreSQL 9.3.x is going end of >> life next month ( Sept 2018), is there a preferred newer version that >> should be used? >> >> >> >> As an experiment I have installed MCF 2.10 supported by PostgreSQL >> 10.4. From the outside all seems to work OK, but investigation of the >> PostgreSQL logs shows a lot of errors: >> >> >> >> e.g. >> >> “2018-08-03 15:50:00.629 BST [7920] LOG: database system was shut down >> at 2018-08-03 15:47:30 BST >> >> 2018-08-03 15:50:00.734 BST [6344] LOG: database system is ready to >> accept connections >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:11.140 BST [6460] WARNING: there is already a >> transaction in progress >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:11.219 BST [6460] WARNING: there is no transaction in >> progress >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:13.844 BST [5716] WARNING: there is already a >> transaction in progress >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:13.879 BST [5716] WARNING: there is no transaction in >> progress >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.218 BST [4140] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to read/write dependencies among transactions >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.218 BST [4140] DETAIL: Reason code: Canceled on >> identification as a pivot, during conflict in checking. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.218 BST [4140] HINT: The transaction might succeed >> if retried. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.218 BST [4140] STATEMENT: INSERT INTO jobqueue >> (jobid,docpriority,checktime,docid,needpriority,dochash,id,checkaction,status) >> VALUES ($1,$2,$3,$4,$5,$6,$7,$8,$9) >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.219 BST [5800] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to read/write dependencies among transactions >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.219 BST [5800] DETAIL: Reason code: Canceled on >> identification as a pivot, during conflict in checking. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.219 BST [5800] HINT: The transaction might succeed >> if retried. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.219 BST [5800] STATEMENT: INSERT INTO jobqueue >> (jobid,docpriority,checktime,docid,needpriority,dochash,id,checkaction,status) >> VALUES ($1,$2,$3,$4,$5,$6,$7,$8,$9) >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.222 BST [5692] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to read/write dependencies among transactions >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.222 BST [5692] DETAIL: Reason code: Canceled on >> identification as a pivot, during conflict in checking. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.222 BST [5692] HINT: The transaction might succeed >> if retried. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:25.222 BST [5692] STATEMENT: INSERT INTO jobqueue >> (jobid,docpriority,checktime,docid,needpriority,dochash,id,checkaction,status) >> VALUES ($1,$2,$3,$4,$5,$6,$7,$8,$9) >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.149 BST [4140] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to read/write dependencies among transactions >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.149 BST [4140] DETAIL: Reason code: Canceled on >> identification as a pivot, during write. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.149 BST [4140] HINT: The transaction might succeed >> if retried. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.149 BST [4140] STATEMENT: UPDATE intrinsiclink SET >> processid=$1,isnew=$2 WHERE jobid=$3 AND parentidhash=$4 AND linktype=$5 >> AND childidhash=$6 >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.261 BST [5156] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to read/write dependencies among transactions >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.261 BST [5156] DETAIL: Reason code: Canceled on >> identification as a pivot, during write. >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:28.261 BST [5156] HINT: The transaction might succeed >> if retried.” >> >> >> >> And >> >> >> >> “2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [5272] ERROR: could not serialize access >> due to concurrent update >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [5272] STATEMENT: SELECT id,status,checktime >> FROM jobqueue WHERE dochash=$1 AND jobid=$2 FOR UPDATE >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [7424] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to concurrent update >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [7424] STATEMENT: SELECT id,status,checktime >> FROM jobqueue WHERE dochash=$1 AND jobid=$2 FOR UPDATE >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [5716] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to concurrent update >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.855 BST [5716] STATEMENT: SELECT id,status,checktime >> FROM jobqueue WHERE dochash=$1 AND jobid=$2 FOR UPDATE >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.856 BST [1328] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to concurrent update >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.856 BST [1328] STATEMENT: SELECT id,status,checktime >> FROM jobqueue WHERE dochash=$1 AND jobid=$2 FOR UPDATE >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.856 BST [5800] ERROR: could not serialize access due >> to concurrent update >> >> 2018-08-03 15:52:42.856 BST [5800] STATEMENT: SELECT id,status,checktime >> FROM jobqueue WHERE dochash=$1 AND jobid=$2 FOR UPDATE” >> >> >> >> Do you have any advice as to whether it is sensible to use PostgreSQL >> v10.x and if so can these errors be overcome? >> >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> >> >> Guy >> >> Unless otherwise stated, this email has been sent from Fujitsu Services >> Limited (registered in England No 96056); Fujitsu EMEA PLC (registered in >> England No 2216100) both with registered offices at: 22 Baker Street, >> London W1U 3BW >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=22+Baker+Street,+London+W1U+3BW&entry=gmail&source=g>; >> PFU (EMEA) Limited, (registered in England No 1578652) and Fujitsu >> Laboratories of Europe Limited (registered in England No. 4153469) both >> with registered offices at: Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, >> Middlesex, UB4 8FE. >> This email is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents >> are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not >> guarantee that this email has not been intercepted and amended or that it >> is virus-free. >> >
