Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes
От
Andres Freund
Тема
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes
Дата
Msg-id
20180811140823.gyxqbtjbr5uitgsf@alap3.anarazel.de
Ответ на
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes (Tomas Vondra)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes "Todd A. Cook" <ToddA.Cook@synopsys.com>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662":read only 0 of 8192 bytes Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": readonly 0 of 8192 bytes Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Hi, On 2018-08-11 15:40:19 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > For the record, I can actually reproduce this on 9.6 (haven't tried > older releases, but I suspect it's there too). Instead of using the > failing subscription, I've used another pgbench script doing this: > SET statement_timeout = 5; > COPY t TO '/dev/null'; > > and doing something like: > > pgbench -n -c 20 -T 300 -f copy.sql test Just to confirm: That's with the vacuum full and insert running concurrently? And then just restarting the above copy.sql (as pgbench errors out after the timeouts) until you get the error? I'm a bit confused what the copy + timeout is doing here? It shouldn't trigger any invalidations itself, and the backtrace appears to be from the insert.sql you posted earlier? Unclear why a copy to /dev/null should trigger anything like this? Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления