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

Re: BUG #5269: postgres backend terminates with SIGSEGV

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Justin Pitts <jpitts(at)bplglobal(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #5269: postgres backend terminates with SIGSEGV
Date: 2010-01-14 15:44:49
Message-ID: 24024.1263483889@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Justin Pitts <jpitts(at)bplglobal(dot)net> writes:
> On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The 100 temp table creations probably will do that just fine.

> Is there a way to verify this?

You could add an elog(LOG, "message") into ResetPlanCache so you could
tell when it had been called.

> I don't follow. Are you suggesting I begin another transaction on connection 1 with a read, and that
> would provoke the crash?

Yes.  The rollback only sets the stage for the next transaction to try
to use a snapshot that isn't there anymore.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-14 16:11:03
Subject: Re: BUG #5276: pg_ctl reads data directory on -D instead of postgresql.conf directoryh
Previous:From: Justin PittsDate: 2010-01-14 15:34:10
Subject: Re: BUG #5269: postgres backend terminates with SIGSEGV

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