[pgpool-general: 1013] Re: using prepared statements when memory_cache_enabled=on

[Lonni J Friedman]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at postgresql.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at postgresql.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at postgresql.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> pg_* functions.  Stuff like pg_prepare, pg_exec, pg_query.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you show us pg_prepare example? I'm interested in what statement
>>>>>>>> names you are using.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> pg_prepare($db, $preparedStatementKey, "SELECT
>>>>>>> id,pass,fail,filtercount,info,current_status,last_update,os,arch,branch,gpu,build_type,subtest,osversion
>>>>>>> FROM cudasmoke WHERE (last_update > $1 AND last_update < $2) AND os=$3
>>>>>>> AND arch=$4 AND branch=$5 AND build_type= $6 AND subtest=$7 AND
>>>>>>> osversion=$8 AND gpu=$9 ORDER BY last_update DESC LIMIT 1" )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what's the content of $preparedStatementKey?
>>>>>
>>>>> Its a unique identifier string for the prepared statement, comprised
>>>>> of the concatenated sha1sum and md5sum of the prepared statement.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it ends up looking something like this:
>>>>> pg_execute($db,a1a3a2f461a0efc2eee2f60f940df6b77eb552f9f5a985165c3ab1665384fa9cce8b1b62,"SELECT
>>>>> id,pass,fail,filtercount,info,current_status,last_update,os,arch,branch,gpu,build_type,subtest,osversion
>>>>> FROM cudasmoke WHERE (last_update > $1 AND last_update < $2) AND os=$3
>>>>> AND arch=$4 AND branch=$5 AND build_type= $6 AND subtest=$7 AND
>>>>> osversion=$8 AND gpu=$9 ORDER BY last_update DESC LIMIT 1);
>>>>
>>>> The statement name is 72 byte long. This is interesting because
>>>> PostgreSQL (and pgpool) does not suppose that statement name is longer
>>>> than 64.  Not sure how this affects to the problem though.
>>>>
>>>> src/include/pg_config_manual.h:
>>>> /*
>>>>  * Maximum length for identifiers (e.g. table names, column names,
>>>>  * function names).  Names actually are limited to one less byte than this,
>>>>  * because the length must include a trailing zero byte.
>>>>  *
>>>>  * Changing this requires an initdb.
>>>>  */
>>>> #define NAMEDATALEN 64
>>>
>>> That is interesting, and I was unaware of this limitation.  Anyway,
>>> even if, for the purposes of experimentation, I only use the sha1sum
>>> (and drop the md5sum) such that the identifier is reduced in size to
>>> 40 bytes, I still see the same failure.  However, one thing that I
>>> noticed is that pgpool doesn't seem to realize that I've attempted to
>>> use a new prepared statement identifier (now just the sha1sum, without
>>> md5sum), and still tries to use the previously cached cached one.
>>>
>>> I'd expect that if I'm preparing a statement with an unused (new)
>>> identifier, it shouldn't pull it from the cache, but it appears to do
>>> so anyway.
>>
>> Why do you think so? If SELECT(and with same parameters) is identical,
>> it should return exactly same results regardress the statement name(of
>> courese I do not account underlying tables get modified).
>
> BTW, we have recently fixed a bug which can cause buffer overrun error:
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgpool2.git;a=commit;h=3964d8204373473e3130a9ba5b260049420dafb6
>
> Because it's a memory destruction error, it may or may not be related to your problem. Can you try with pgpool-II 3.2-stable head?

ok, I've done that now, but the same problem is still present.