On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:50 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2013-10-31 11:33:28 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> Wait, that sounds horrible. If you kill -9 the server, and then rm -rf >> $PGDATA, the shared memory segment is leaked until next reboot? I find that >> unacceptable. There are many scenarios where you never restart postmaster >> after a crash. For example, if you have an automatic failover setup; you >> fail over to the standby in case of crash, and re-initialize the old master >> with e.g rsync. > > Our main shared memory segment works the same way, doesn't it? And it > has for a long time.
It does, and what's the alternative, anyway? I mean, if the user or the system decides to terminate all of the postgres processes on the machine with extreme prejudice, like kill -9, we can't do anything afterwards, and we can't do anything beforehand, either. Of course, it would be nice if there were an operating system API that said - give me a named shared memory segment that automatically goes away when the last active reference is gone. But, except on Windows, no such API appears to exist. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
