what type of start up script are you talking about here?
On 10/21/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 10/20/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I think the TIP that's really needed is never remove postmaster.pid by hand.
When the machine
Its always said that don't kill -9 postmaster.
Whats the reason not to do it. Why is it so strictly prohibited?
Thanks,
~Harpreet.
Harpreet Dhaliwal writes:
Its always said that don't kill -9 postmaster.
Whats the reason not to do it. Why is it so strictly prohibited?
,[
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/postmaster-shutdown.html#AEN18182 ]
| It is best not to use SIGKILL to shut down the server. Doing so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/20/06 05:27, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
Harpreet Dhaliwal writes:
Its always said that don't kill -9 postmaster.
Whats the reason not to do it. Why is it so strictly prohibited?
,[
Ron Johnson writes:
On 10/20/06 05:27, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
,[
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/postmaster-shutdown.html#AEN18182
]
| It is best not to use SIGKILL to shut down the server. Doing so will
| prevent the server from releasing shared memory and semaphores,
Am Freitag, 20. Oktober 2006 13:12 schrieb Ron Johnson:
But it can't be fatal, can it? After all, that's what a system
crash is, right?
Perhaps we should add another tip not to crash the system.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of
Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
Ron Johnson writes:
On 10/20/06 05:27, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
,[
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/postmaster-shutdown.html#AEN18182 ]
| It is best not to use SIGKILL to shut down the server. Doing so will
| prevent the server from releasing shared
Shane Ambler wrote:
The one thing worse than kill -9 the postmaster is pulling the power
cord out of the server. Which is what makes UPS's so good.
If your server is changing the data file on disk and you pull the power
cord, what chance do you expect of reading that data file again?
1.
If your server is changing the data file on disk and you pull the power
cord, what chance do you expect of reading that data file again?1.That's what we have WAL for.The only thing that can really killyou is the use of non-battery-backed write cache.
Just for information: I had to suffer
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 10:56:09PM +0930, Shane Ambler wrote:
Someone in the thread mentioned having to clean up shared mem. I've had
to do this often with oracle:
root# ipcs
-- Shared Memory Segments
keyshmid owner perms bytes nattch status
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Shane Ambler wrote:
The one thing worse than kill -9 the postmaster is pulling the power
cord out of the server. Which is what makes UPS's so good.
If your server is changing the data file on disk and you pull the power
cord, what chance do you
On 10/20/06, Shane Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After all, that's what a system crash is, right? A system crash is safer in that it won't leave orphaned child
processes or IPC/synchronization resources around, making it more comparable to a SIGQUIT than a SIGKILL.The one thing worse than kill
Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
On 10/20/06, Shane Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The one thing worse than kill -9 the postmaster is pulling the power
cord out of the server. Which is what makes UPS's so good.
Well, I think that pulling the power cord is much safer than killing -9
the postmaster.
Shane Ambler wrote:
Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
On 10/20/06, Shane Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The one thing worse than kill -9 the postmaster is pulling the power
cord out of the server. Which is what makes UPS's so good.
Well, I think that pulling the power cord is much safer than
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 12:20:35AM +0930, Shane Ambler wrote:
If you kill -9 the postmaster the system can still finish sending
changes to disk and close the file but pulling the power cord can stop a
write in the middle of a block giving you half new data and half old
data in the one file.
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
Well, if you kill -9 the postmaster all the connections stay alive and
stay processing tuples and writing to disk, except the coordination is
gone.
The postmaster isn't involved in any critical inter-backend coordination.
If you kill -9 the
After all that discussion that took place while i was sleeping, I have a few more questions simply haunting me.Someitmes, rather most of the times, when I start postgres using pg_ctl, it says antoher postmaster is running. Being a total naive about the hazzards of kill -9 postmaster, i simply used
On 10/20/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Shane Ambler wrote:
The one thing worse than kill -9 the postmaster is pulling the power
cord out of the server. Which is what makes UPS's so good.
If your server is changing the data file on disk and
Ian Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 10/20/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally I think the TIP that's really needed is never remove
postmaster.pid by hand.
When the machine crashes, don't you have to remove the pid file by
hand to get the Postgres to start? I seem to
19 matches
Mail list logo
