This is a discussion on Re: ERROR: could not read block within the pgsql Admins forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> I got the error log working on Windows (with redirect_stderr). I had to stop and restart postgres to do ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| I got the error log working on Windows (with redirect_stderr). I had to stop and restart postgres to do so. I ran the query (for the fourth time), and it completed successfully. I'm not inclined to believe that changing the redirect_stderr setting would change this behavior, so I guess that either it is a coincidence or the restart cleared some bad state within postgres. Is there anything that anyone wants me to do at this point, to try to pin down a cause, or do I drop it here? -Kevin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |
| |||
| If I have followed the chain correctly, I saw that you were trying to run an update statement on a large number of records in a large table right? I have changed my strategy in the past for this type of problem. I don't know if it would have fixed this problem or not, but I have seen with Postgres and Oracle that updates like this on a large table may take very long and cause contention processes. Anyway, the method I normally use is to write a script that selects the records into a cursor and updates one at a time by the primary key, and then committing the transaction every so often (i.e. 500 - 1000 records). This way there will not be the overhead associated with an extremely large transaction, and the script will complete much faster (I have seen hours vs. minutes). Hope this helps. Kevin Kevin Grittner wrote: >I got the error log working on Windows (with redirect_stderr). I had >to stop and restart postgres to do so. I ran the query (for the fourth >time), and it completed successfully. > >I'm not inclined to believe that changing the redirect_stderr setting >would change this behavior, so I guess that either it is a >coincidence or the restart cleared some bad state within postgres. > >Is there anything that anyone wants me to do at this point, to try >to pin down a cause, or do I drop it here? > >-Kevin > > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |
| ||||
| On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Kevin Grittner wrote: > I got the error log working on Windows (with redirect_stderr). I had > to stop and restart postgres to do so. I ran the query (for the fourth > time), and it completed successfully. Strange - the phyiscal read for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th time should be the same, if we intent to think of the IO presure. > > Is there anything that anyone wants me to do at this point, to try > to pin down a cause, or do I drop it here? > Since you can reproduce the error with big chance, I think it is a good chance to pin down a cause now. It would be useful to know the GetLastError() instead of a tranlated errno. Can you patch the code like this (patch smgrread()): http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...0/msg00050.php Regards, Qingqing ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |