| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Roberts, Jon" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg crashing |
| Date: | 2008-07-02 06:26:23 |
| Message-ID: | 3965.1214979983@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Another problem is that postmaster children that do
>> PGSharedMemoryDetach will still have valid inherited handles for
>> the shmem segment --- does that factor into the behavior? It looks
>> to me like the CloseHandle ought to be in PGSharedMemoryDetach.
> Not as long as the processes die. If they die, their handles go with
> them, and once the reference count goes to zero, the object goes away.
But the syslogger process (and maybe others) is *not* supposed to die.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-07-02 06:34:04 | Re: pg crashing |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-07-02 06:21:04 | Re: pg crashing |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-07-02 06:34:04 | Re: pg crashing |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-02 06:23:26 | Re: Limits of backwards compatibility for psql's \d commands |