Hi, Tom,

One more question. I'm new to PostgreSQL and not an expert in debugging. After 
checking the manual, I think I need to turn on the following parameters in 
order to generate debug info. Do you think doing so would give us what we need 
to pinpoint the problem?

debug_assertions
trace_notify
trace_sort
debug_print_parse
debug_print_rewritten
debug_print_plan 
debug_pretty_print

Thanks.



 --- On Tue 07/10, Tom Lane < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
From: Tom Lane [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
     Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:04:41 -0400
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] exit code -1073741819

"Shuo Liu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:> The log shows the following message:> 
CurTransactionContext: 0 total in 0 blocks; 0 free (0 chunks); 0 used> 
ExecutorState: 122880 total in 4 blocks; 1912 free (9 chunks); 120968 used> 
ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 8176 free (0 chunks); 16 used> 
ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 8176 free (0 chunks); 16 used> 
ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 8000 free (1 chunks); 192 used> 
ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 8000 free (1 chunks); 192 used> 
ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 8096 free (1 chunks); 96 used> SPI Exec: 0 
total in 0 blocks; 0 free (0 chunks); 0 used> SPI Proc: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 
2616 free (0 chunks); 5576 used> ExecutorState: 57344 total in 3 blocks; 35776 
free (7 chunks); 21568 used> ExprContext: 0 total in 0 blocks; 0 free (0 
chunks); 0 usedThe above is a fragment of a memory stats dump, which normally 
wouldonly be emitted if you had an out-of-memory situation.  However thepart of 
it that you've shown
  
doesn't indicate any particularly heavymemory usage.  Were there any large 
numbers in the preceding similarly-formatted lines?  Was there anything 
possibly relevant in the logentries before that?> 2007-07-10 12:25:57 LOG:  
server process (PID 2004) exited with exit code -1073741819I suppose you're on 
Windows?  This is what is currently printed for anAccess Violation trap on 
Windows.  The fact that it came out partwaythrough a stats dump is pretty 
suspicious; it suggests that the traphappened as a result of trying to scan the 
memory context bookkeepingdata, which implies a memory clobber of some sort.So 
you're looking at a bug, but there's much too little data here toguess what the 
bug is.  Can you get a debugger stack trace?  Or puttogether a self-contained 
test case for someone else to poke at?Actually the *first* thing to do is make 
sure you are up to date onboth Postgres and PostGIS versions.  No sense in 
spending a lot of timechasing down a bug if it's already been fixed.
        
                regards, tom lane

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

               http://archives.postgresql.org/

Reply via email to