Re: Quite strange crash

From: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers)
Subject: Re: Quite strange crash
Date: 2001-01-09 05:55:09
Message-ID: 0101091155090A.00613@dyp.perchine.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Well, I found a smoking gun: ...
> > What seems to have happened is that 2501 curled up and died, leaving
> > one or more buffer spinlocks locked. ...
> > There is something pretty fishy about this. You aren't by any chance
> > running the postmaster under a ulimit setting that might cut off
> > individual backends after a certain amount of CPU time, are you?
> > What signal does a ulimit violation deliver on your machine, anyway?
>
> It's worth noting here that modern Unixes run around killing user-level
> processes more or less at random when free swap space (and sometimes
> just RAM) runs low. AIX was the first such, but would send SIGDANGER
> to processes first to try to reclaim some RAM; critical daemons were
> expected to explicitly ignore SIGDANGER. Other Unixes picked up the
> idea without picking up the SIGDANGER behavior.

That's not the case for sure. There are 512Mb on the machine, and when I had
this problem it was compltely unloaded (>300Mb in caches).

--
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-01-09 06:03:54 Re: Quite strange crash
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-01-09 05:47:34 Re: V7.0 Error: OID ##### no longer exists in pg_databas e