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

Re: Hung postmaster (8.3.9)

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hung postmaster (8.3.9)
Date: 2010-03-02 09:49:31
Message-ID: 407d949e1003020149u42b07216w22376e08b9a2a456@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
We should probably also check and prohibit including directories as files.

On Tuesday, March 2, 2010, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> In the meantime, it seems like we ought to take two defensive steps:


-- 
greg

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-03-02 09:58:20
Subject: Re: WAL replay does not verify integrity
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-03-02 09:48:28
Subject: Re: pg_stop_backup does not complete

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Asher HoskinsDate: 2010-03-02 10:47:03
Subject: to_timestamp() and quarters
Previous:From: Adrian von BidderDate: 2010-03-02 07:49:13
Subject: Re: Optimizer: ranges and partial indices? Or use partitioning?

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