Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)
Prabhat Sahu <prabhat.sahu@enterprisedb.com>
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Prabhat Sahu < > prabhat.sahu@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> >> 2018-03-07 19:24:44.263 IST [54400] LOG: background worker "parallel >> worker" (PID 54482) was terminated by signal 9: Killed >> > > That looks like the background worker got killed by the OOM killer. How > much memory do you have in the machine where this occurred? > I have ran the testcase in my local machine with below configurations: Environment: CentOS 7(64bit) HD : 100GB RAM: 4GB Processor: 4 I have nerrowdown the testcase as below, which also reproduce the same crash. -- GUCs under postgres.conf maintenance_work_mem = 8GB ./pgbench -i -s 500 -d postgres postgres=# create index pgb_acc_idx3 on pgbench_accounts(aid, abalance,filler); WARNING: terminating connection because of crash of another server process DETAIL: The postmaster has commanded this server process to roll back the current transaction and exit, because another server process exited abnormally and possibly corrupted shared memory. HINT: In a moment you should be able to reconnect to the database and repeat your command. server closed the connection unexpectedly This probably means the server terminated abnormally before or while processing the request. The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed. !> -- With Regards, Prabhat Kumar Sahu Skype ID: prabhat.sahu1984 EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- With Regards, Prabhat Kumar Sahu Skype ID: prabhat.sahu1984 EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:12 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > On March 7, 2018 5:40:18 PM PST, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > >On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Tomas Vondra > ><tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> FWIW that's usually written to the system log. Does dmesg say > >something > >> about the kill? > > > >While it would be nice to confirm that it was indeed the OOM killer, > >either way the crash happened because SIGKILL was sent to a parallel > >worker. There is no reason to suspect a bug. > > Not impossible there's a leak somewhere though. > > Andres > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >
Commits
-
Support parallel btree index builds.
- 9da0cc35284b 11.0 landed
-
Report an ERROR if a parallel worker fails to start properly.
- 2badb5afb89c 11.0 cited
-
Transfer state pertaining to pending REINDEX operations to workers.
- 29d58fd3adae 11.0 landed
-
Add a barrier primitive for synchronizing backends.
- 1145acc70deb 11.0 cited
-
Allow DML commands that create tables to use parallel query.
- e9baa5e9fa14 11.0 cited
-
Refactor GetOldestXmin() to use flags
- af4b1a0869bd 10.0 cited
-
Fix regression in parallel planning against inheritance tables.
- 2609e91fcf9d 10.0 cited
-
Don't create "holes" in BufFiles, in the new logtape code.
- 7ac4a389a7db 10.0 cited
-
Simplify the code for logical tape read buffers.
- b75f467b6eec 10.0 cited
-
Fix excessive memory consumption in the new sort pre-reading code.
- b56fb691b003 10.0 cited
-
Implement binary heap replace-top operation in a smarter way.
- 24598337c8d2 10.0 cited
-
Cosmetic code cleanup in commands/extension.c.
- 25794e841e5b 10.0 cited
-
Speed up planner's scanning for parallel-query hazards.
- da1c91631e35 10.0 cited
-
Read from the same worker repeatedly until it returns no tuple.
- bc7fcab5e36b 9.6.0 cited
-
Improve tuplesort.c to support variable merge order. The original coding
- df700e6b4019 8.2.0 cited