Re: [HACKERS] Re: Odd behavior in regression test?

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian)
Cc: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Odd behavior in regression test?
Date: 1998-06-27 14:46:53
Message-ID: 199806271446.KAA20899@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Is it possible that the recent change from fork/exec to just fork leaves
> > the postmaster more exposed? I can imagine that it might, but don't have
> > any direct experience with it so am just guessing. Any other ideas? Do
> > people see this on other platforms? This is the first time I can recall
> > seeing the postmaster go away on a crash of a backend (but of course my
> > memory isn't what it should be :)
>
> My guess is that the postmaster can no longer restart its backends after
> one of them aborts. Something I need to check into perhaps.
>

This is now fixed.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-06-27 15:48:42 binding table
Previous Message James Olin Oden 1998-06-27 10:29:30 Re: [SQL] isnull function]