On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 05:45:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I suppose there's a bug in this path, but I'm darned if I can see what
> > it is. There are a number of obvious inefficiencies, but those
> > shouldn't be important given that this isn't supposed to happen much.
> > But how's it getting to the Assert failure?
>
> While I'm disinclined to change anything until we can explain why it's
> crashing, I suspect that the solution may be to avoid the recursive call
> of SimpleLruReadPage, as in the attached patch. Jim, are you interested
> in seeing if this patch makes the problem go away for you?
Well, this is a production system... what's the risk with that patch?
BTW, is it typical to see a 10 difference between asserts on and off? My
client has a process that was doing 10-20 records/sec with asserts on
and 90-110 with asserts off.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461