From: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs |
Date: | 2004-11-09 02:28:57 |
Message-ID: | 200411081928.57211.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Monday November 8 2004 7:24, Ed L. wrote:
> On Monday November 8 2004 6:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Ed L." <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> writes:
> > > A power failure led to failed postmaster restart using 7.4.6 (see
> > > output below). The short-term fix is usually to delete the pid file
> > > and restart.
> > >
> > > I often wonder why ipcs never seems to show the shared memory
> > > block in question?
> >
> > The shared memory block would certainly not still exist after a system
> > reboot, so what we have here is a misleading error message. Looking at
> > the code, the most plausible explanation appears to be that
> > shmctl(IPC_STAT) is failing (which it ought to) and returning some
> > errno code different from EINVAL (which is the case we are expecting to
> > see). What platform are you on, and what does its shmctl(2) man page
> > document as error conditions?
>
> Platform is Linux 2.4.20-30.9 on i686 (Pentium 4, I think).
I recently saw this same thing happen from a power failure on several HPUX
boxes as well (I think running B.11.00/11.23 with 7.3.4/7.3.7, but not
sure).
Ed
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2004-11-09 03:34:16 | Per-Table Transaction Isolation Level? |
Previous Message | Ed L. | 2004-11-09 02:24:31 | Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Hansen | 2004-11-09 03:26:49 | Re: unnest |
Previous Message | Ed L. | 2004-11-09 02:24:31 | Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs |