| From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Day, David" <dday(at)redcom(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: segmentation fault postgres 9.3.5 core dump perlu related ? |
| Date: | 2015-01-29 23:09:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAFaPBrTQJrTd9cHU8J4Qd-MH2r4UqmL91zv7UVNVuXn3M=sc+g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Day, David <dday(at)redcom(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks for the inputs, I’ll attempt to apply it and will update when I
> have some new information.
>
>
>
BTW a quick check would be to attach with gdb right after you connect,
check info threads (there should be none), run the plperlu procedure (with
the right arguments/calls to hit all the execution paths), check info
threads again. If info threads now reports a thread, we are likely looking
at the right plperlu code. It should just be a matter of commenting stuff
out to deduce what makes the thread. If not, it could be that plperlu is
not at fault and its something else like an extension or some other
procedure/pl.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2015-01-29 23:17:03 | Re: 4B row limit for CLOB tables |
| Previous Message | Adam Mackler | 2015-01-29 22:27:01 | Re: Conflicting function name in dynamically-loaded shared library |