Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
Date: 2007-03-30 17:39:05
Message-ID: 21578.1175276345@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Hmmm, remember that DatabaseCancelAutovacuumActivity is called on CREATE
> DATABASE; but what it does is send SIGINT, not SIGTERM.  Also, it's not
> in 8.2.  SIGINT does terminate the autovac process however.
> I haven't read the whole problem report completely, so I'm not sure this
> has something to do or not.

AFAICT, SIGINT should be okay, because it will lead to an ERROR not a
FATAL elog; so control should fall out through the CATCH block before
the autovacuum process quits.  The problem is with FATAL elogs.

Mark reports that the only FATAL lines in his logs are instances of
	FATAL:  terminating connection due to administrator command
	FATAL:  database "launchpad_ftest" does not exist
and the latter presumably isn't coming out from within the btree vacuum
code, so I don't see any other explanation for a FATAL exit than SIGTERM.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-03-30 17:50:16
Subject: Re: Proposal: include PL/Proxy into core
Previous:From: Pavan DeolaseeDate: 2007-03-30 17:21:25
Subject: Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group