From: | Stephen Harris <lists(at)spuddy(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Shutting down a warm standby database in |
Date: | 2006-11-30 15:59:22 |
Message-ID: | 20061130155922.GA24556@pugwash.spuddy.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 09:58:52AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > > Stephen Harris wrote:
> > >> Should this cause a coredump when it happens?
> >
> > > You should never get a core file.
> >
> > elog(PANIC) => abort() => core dump. This is completely expected.
>
> Well, then I should have said there is no reason you should ever get a
> panic.
Well, as Tom said earlier in the thread
> I see different results. This time recovery aborts with a PANIC.
Yeah, that's expected since the whole recovery process is a critical
section. We could change that but it's cosmetic.
Because of the changes made, we don't actually need to do a database
shutdown. Merely killing the restore_command process (eg with kill -9)
appears to cause the same effect.
And now a personal opinion...
I think this is more than cosmetic; shutting down a standby database
cleanly is critical functionality for proper warm-standby procedures.
What we have now "works", but should be tidied up. Probably low on the
priority queue though :-)
--
rgds
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Leonel Nunez | 2006-11-30 16:04:42 | Re: Need testers for 8.2 RC1 RPMs |
Previous Message | Enrico | 2006-11-30 15:38:37 | Re: Stripping kernel FreeBSD - postgres |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Leonel Nunez | 2006-11-30 16:04:42 | Re: Need testers for 8.2 RC1 RPMs |
Previous Message | Devrim GUNDUZ | 2006-11-30 15:14:36 | Need testers for 8.2 RC1 RPMs |