From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Frank Bax <fbax(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: connection timeout? |
Date: | 2007-02-04 17:45:21 |
Message-ID: | 20210.1170611121@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Frank Bax <fbax(at)sympatico(dot)ca> writes:
> Script and database are both on same system. Faster system was able
> to get past next database access. So far so good, script continues
> to run. Still curious why it failed on slower system, though.
There's no connection timeout built into PG itself. The message implies
that something sent the backend a SIGTERM signal, which makes me wonder
if you are running the postmaster under ulimit settings that include
a finite limit on process CPU or I/O expenditure. Some platforms have
special signals for that (SIGXCPU etc) but I think some just send
SIGTERM when a process goes over the limit.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-04 17:56:13 | Re: Accessing RECORD variable info |
Previous Message | Shoaib Mir | 2007-02-04 08:35:20 | Re: connection timeout? |