Re: Shutting down a warm standby database in

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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