Обсуждение: Re: ERROR: could not read block

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка

Re: ERROR: could not read block

От
"Kevin Grittner"
Дата:
Ran with this change.  Didn't take long to hit it.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do.

[2005-11-16 11:59:29.015 ] 4904 <dtr dtr 165.219.88.22(60649)> LOG:
read failed on relation 1663/16385/1494810: -1 bytes, 1450
[2005-11-16 11:59:29.015 ] 4904 <dtr dtr 165.219.88.22(60649)> ERROR:
could not read block 25447 of relation 1663/16385/1494810: Invalid
argument

>>> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>  >>>

I think this is just cosmetic, but try %ld instead of %d in the elog
format strings.

Re: ERROR: could not read block

От
Qingqing Zhou
Дата:

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Kevin Grittner wrote:

> Ran with this change.  Didn't take long to hit it.
>
> [2005-11-16 11:59:29.015 ] 4904 <dtr dtr 165.219.88.22(60649)> LOG:
> read failed on relation 1663/16385/1494810: -1 bytes, 1450
> [2005-11-16 11:59:29.015 ] 4904 <dtr dtr 165.219.88.22(60649)> ERROR:
> could not read block 25447 of relation 1663/16385/1494810: Invalid
> argument
>

1450 ERROR_NO_SYSTEM_RESOURCES
Insufficient system resources exist to complete the requested service

SQL Server 7.0 experienced the same problem before:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274310

Some registration value tweak to solve it (for backup service):
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304101

I have to go out for a while ... Kevin, can you take a look at the 2nd
thread to see if it is possible to change some reg values to temporarily
solve the problem. A more robust solution will follow a retry style
following thread 1 I guess.

Cheers,
Qingqing

Re: ERROR: could not read block

От
Tom Lane
Дата:
Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu> writes:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> [2005-11-16 11:59:29.015 ] 4904 <dtr dtr 165.219.88.22(60649)> LOG:
>> read failed on relation 1663/16385/1494810: -1 bytes, 1450

> 1450 ERROR_NO_SYSTEM_RESOURCES
> Insufficient system resources exist to complete the requested service

Hmm ... seems like win32/error.c ought to be mapping that to something
more helpful than EINVAL.  The link you mention suggests that we ought
to retry the read, so maybe mapping it to EINTR would be the most useful
thing.  I seem to recall that we've heard about read() sometimes failing
with EINTR on Unix-with-NFS configurations ...

            regards, tom lane