Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

Andres Freund writes: > It doesn't seem impossible to get into a situation where syslogger is > the source of the OOM. Just enabling a lot of logging in a workload with > many large query strings might do it. So making it less likely to be > killed might make the problem

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On November 16, 2017 7:06:23 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote: >Andres Freund writes: >> On 2017-11-16 21:39:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >>> What might be worth thinking about is allowing the syslogger process >to >>> inherit the postmaster's OOM-kill-proofness

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-11-16 21:39:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> What might be worth thinking about is allowing the syslogger process to >> inherit the postmaster's OOM-kill-proofness setting, instead of dropping >> down to the same vulnerability as the postmaster's

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On 2017-11-16 21:39:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > We could work around a situation like that if we made postmaster use a > > *different* pipe as stderr than the one we're handing to normal > > backends. If postmaster created a new pipe and closed the read end > > whenever forking a syslogger, we

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-11-06 15:35:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Pacheco writes: >>> I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It >>> looks like what happened was that the syslogger process exited because it >>> ran out

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-11-17 11:09:56 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> when redirection_done is switched to true because the first process >> generating a message to the syslogger pipe needs to open it first if >> not done yet? > > I

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On 2017-11-17 11:09:56 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2017-11-06 15:35:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> David Pacheco writes: > >> > I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-11-06 15:35:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Pacheco writes: >> > I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It >> > looks like what happened was that the syslogger

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On 2017-11-06 15:35:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > David Pacheco writes: > > I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It > > looks like what happened was that the syslogger process exited because it > > ran out of memory. But before the postmaster got a

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Pacheco writes: > > I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It > > looks like what happened was that the syslogger process exited because it > > ran out of memory. But

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Pacheco writes: > > ... that process appears to have exited due to a fatal error > > (out of memory). (I know it exited because the process still exists in > the > > kernel -- it hasn't been reaped

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

David Pacheco writes: > I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It > looks like what happened was that the syslogger process exited because it > ran out of memory. But before the postmaster got a chance to handle the > SIGCLD to restart it, it handled

[GENERAL] postmaster deadlock while logging after syslogger exited

Hello, I ran into what appears to be a deadlock in the logging subsystem. It looks like what happened was that the syslogger process exited because it ran out of memory. But before the postmaster got a chance to handle the SIGCLD to restart it, it handled a SIGUSR1 to start an autovacuum

[GENERAL] Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU

Postmaster's been spinning at 99/100% for a few hours. trying to get an idea what would have caused it. I'm on PG 8.3.5 linux. Here's the gdb output (I'm not really all that gdb savvy, so if something else would let me know) 0x08281959 in textin () (gdb) bt #0 0x08281959 in textin () #1

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM, David Kerr d...@mr-paradox.net wrote: Postmaster's been spinning at 99/100% for a few hours. What does select * from pg_stat_activity show you? Look for your long(est) running query. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU

Looks like it was a query that was running. once my developer killed it the CPU went back down. I'm a little surprised by that, the backend process for that developer wasn't taking up a lot of CPU, just the postmaster itself. Any idea why that would be? Thanks Dave On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU

David Kerr d...@mr-paradox.net writes: Looks like it was a query that was running. once my developer killed it the CPU went back down. I'm a little surprised by that, the backend process for that developer wasn't taking up a lot of CPU, just the postmaster itself. The backtrace you showed

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:38:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: - David Kerr d...@mr-paradox.net writes: - Looks like it was a query that was running. once my developer killed it the CPU went back down. - I'm a little surprised by that, the backend process for that developer wasn't taking up a lot

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

On top of what the other poster said, I'm wondering if you're not getting any kind of postmaster not cleanly shutdown, recovery initiated or something like that when you first start it up. You don't tend to see a lot of messages after that until recovery is completed. What does top and / or

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote: Hard to say with what you've told us so far. what more should I post/need? I was suspecting that as well as I've never had postgres be silent and not work -- I've also never let a db fill its disk and get f'ed like

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Aaron Glenn aaron.gl...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote: Hard to say with what you've told us so far. what more should I post/need? I was suspecting that as well as I've Remember that mentiion of

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 01:18:46AM -0700, Aaron Glenn wrote: On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote: start run it's course? for a 35GB+ database how long should I wait? is there no way to log the status of what the postgres daemon is actually doing

[GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

Greetings, I've gotten myself in a pickle and had a postgresql (8.2) instance fill its disk completely and shutdown itself down. I've moved the entire data directory to a new, larger slice however postmaster never finishes starting. Despite configuring postgresql.conf for excessive 'verboseness'

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster never finishes starting up, silent to boot

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Aaron Glenn wrote: Despite configuring postgresql.conf for excessive 'verboseness' nothing gets outputted to syslog or the --log specified file. You shouldn't trust those destinations for getting really unusual errors starting the server. Change your log_destination

[GENERAL] postmaster hangs on delete from

Hi, I have a serious issue with delete from. When I do something like: delete from CALC_INVOICE_DATA where PERIOD_END='2011-01-01' the postmaster takes 100% CPU and then nothing happens. Doing any type of select on the same table works just fine, I have tried various forms of vacuums and

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster hangs on delete from

On Friday 13 March 2009, e...@devdep.com wrote: Hi, I have a serious issue with delete from. When I do something like: delete from CALC_INVOICE_DATA where PERIOD_END='2011-01-01' the postmaster takes 100% CPU and then nothing happens. Some possibilities: 1) If it's using 100% CPU for a

[GENERAL] postmaster LISTENing on UDP port 32938

Found this on a recent install. I don't find anything documented on why postmaster is LISTENing on this port. What's the purpose? If it's not required how to disable? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster LISTENing on UDP port 32938

rhubbell wrote: Found this on a recent install. I don't find anything documented on why postmaster is LISTENing on this port. What's the purpose? If it's not required how to disable? It should just be localhost and I believe it's the stats collector talking to the rest of the system. --

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster LISTENing on UDP port 32938

Richard Huxton d...@archonet.com writes: rhubbell wrote: Found this on a recent install. I don't find anything documented on why postmaster is LISTENing on this port. What's the purpose? If it's not required how to disable? It should just be localhost and I believe it's the stats collector

[GENERAL] Postmaster exit code 128 on Windows 2003 Server

Hi, I am running Postgresql 8.3.0 in a Windows 2003 Server (64bit). Database is being replicated with Slony-I. The main application was developed in php 5.2 and uses the php standard pgsql.dll connector to database. There are a few client-server processes that also uses the database.

[GENERAL] postmaster logfile

What's a good way to start the postmaster, send the log info to a logfile somewhere, and return the linux prompt? v8.2.0 on suse64 Thanks -dave

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster logfile

On Dec 3, 2007 2:35 PM, Gauthier, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's a good way to start the postmaster, send the log info to a logfile somewhere, and return the linux prompt? Use whatever startup script comes with the pacakge for your OS. I.e. in redhat or suse you should have a postgresql

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster logfile

To: Gauthier, Dave Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] postmaster logfile On Dec 3, 2007 2:35 PM, Gauthier, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's a good way to start the postmaster, send the log info to a logfile somewhere, and return the linux prompt? Use whatever startup script

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster logfile

Gauthier, Dave escribió: Well, I can start the server with postmaster -D /myplace/db ... and then... ^z bg ... to get to the prompt. But each/every time a message from the postmaster gets logged, it goes to stdout of the current window. I want it to go to a logfile.

[GENERAL] Postmaster does not shut down

A 'bad' thing happened yesterday. Postgresql 8.1.X FreeBSD 6.0 At some point in the day, ran out of space on the root filesystem. (db is elsewhere) Took about 10 minutes to clear enough space to make processes stop freaking out and to slow my heart-rate down to below 200 beats per minute.

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

think.MCPs.I heard people complaining about my posting format. I use the hotmail web interface and the way they send the message is beyond my control ;-| Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 18:13:02 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

I promised that I will get back to the group with the reason. Well, of course was a query :). I do use a search engine file system based(lucene) that will take any desired entity saved into the database and find the primary keys and then do a select * from entity where id is in (:ids)If

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]I promised that I will get back to the group with the reason. Well, of course was a query :). I do use a search engine file systembased(lucene) that will take any desired entity saved

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

2007 16:35:40 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:20:28PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote:pack of postmaster(4-22) processes ran by postgres user are taking over almost all the CPU

[GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

Hi,I have this server that I use as db database. It's decent box Ubuntu, 2GB, AMD Barton 2.8Gb L2 2Mb. DB version is 7.4.7 - that version was the only one available at that time. I have it for about 2 years in similar configuration. Lately I've notices that a pack of postmaster(4-22)

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

Anyone ?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPUDate: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 13:23:00 -0500 Hi,I have this server that I use as db server. It's decent box Ubuntu, 2GB, AMD Barton 2.8Gb L2 2Mb. DB version is 7.4.7 - that version was the only

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:20:28PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote: pack of postmaster(4-22) processes ran by postgres user are taking over almost all the CPU. What else is the box doing? If it doesn't have any other work to do, why shouldn't postgres use the CPU time? (This is a way of saying, You

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

Have you done a full vacuum and not just a reqular vacuum? - Ericson Smith Developer http://www.funadvice.com On 6/8/07, Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:20:28PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote: pack of postmaster(4-22) processes ran by postgres user are taking

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:20:28PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote:pack of postmaster(4-22) processes ran by postgres user are taking over almost all the CPU. What else is the box doing

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

I did that remotely, thru the psqladmin. How do I do it from that box ? Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:41:57 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Have you done a full vacuum and not just a reqular vacuum

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:35:40 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:20:28PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote: pack of postmaster(4-22) processes ran by postgres user are taking over

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

First, your mail is coming through really garbled. Maybe you need to add some linebreaks or something? Anyway On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 03:58:40PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote: I'm not sure I understand the question. What else runs on it ?I have an Apache that fronts a Tomcat (Java Enterprise App

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MC Moisei Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 11:11 PM To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU I did that remotely, thru the psqladmin. How do I do it from that box

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 05:11:44PM -0400, Ericson Smith wrote: Also, if you're updating that table frequently, lots of dead tuples will remain in there if you don't do a VACUUM FULL regularly. No, they won't. No well-tuned postgres installation has needed VACUUM FULL in a long time. VACUUM

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

is that if something delays my many postmasters would automatically feel my 2GB off RAM and take over the CPU and eventually swap.Thanks for getting back to me, much appreciated.MC Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:55:26 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster processes taking all the CPU

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 05:08:26PM -0500, MC Moisei wrote: Yes all the connection are coming from within the box so no network latency.Well, isn't the swap can be because too many process postmaster are requiring more memory. But why are they requring more memory? Do you maybe have (e.g.)

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster disconnects after heavy load inserts from plperlu - waht to do?

Oh Sorry yes of corse. No Error Msg just a : sign and disconnectet (I use pgadmin3 for this) My develop postgres is on 8.2 on a windows machine. And thanks for the hint with the log, I found a related Bug http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-12/msg00163.php After an update of my

[GENERAL] postmaster disconnects after heavy load inserts from plperlu - waht to do?

Hello! I have written a function to load yahoo quote data. abut after parsing the inserts will overload the server and disconnects. What sould I do to avound this? THX Christian Maier PS Here the function: CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION get_yahoo(VARCHAR(20), BIGINT, VARCHAR(3)) RETURNS INTEGER AS

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster disconnects after heavy load inserts from plperlu - waht to do?

Christian Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have written a function to load yahoo quote data. abut after parsing the inserts will overload the server and disconnects. You'll need to be a lot more specific than that. What error messages do you see exactly? What shows up in the postmaster log?

[GENERAL] postmaster slowing down

Title: Re: [GENERAL] upgrade to 8.0.9 I am using postgres 8.0.0 In my programI have a single connection to a database. in side this connection i do the following 1. begin transaction 2. insert rows to table/s. (max number of tables = 4) 3. commit transaction the above 3 steps take

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster slowing down

surabhi.ahuja wrote: I am using postgres 8.0.0 In my program I have a single connection to a database. in side this connection i do the following 1. begin transaction 2. insert rows to table/s. (max number of tables = 4) 3. commit transaction the above 3 steps take place around 800, 000

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster slowing down

Title: Re: [GENERAL] postmaster slowing down Answer to Question 1: I forgot to mention this: before i start running thisprogram (refer to the mail below) I clean up (rm -rf) and create the data directory (PGDATA, by doing initdb) then i create the 4 tables (stored procedures etc

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster slowing down

surabhi.ahuja wrote: Answer to Question 1: I forgot to mention this: before i start running this program (refer to the mail below) I clean up (rm -rf) and create the data directory (PGDATA, by doing initdb) then i create the 4 tables (stored procedures etc) and then run the program Please see

[GENERAL] postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device or address

Using a legacy installation ( 7.2.3 ). Occasionally the system will reach a state where attempted psql connection attempts fail, with the following error in the postgresql log: postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device or address Will also occasionally get no connection to server

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device or address

Reid Thompson wrote: Using a legacy installation ( 7.2.3 ). Occasionally the system will reach a state where attempted psql connection attempts fail, with the following error in the postgresql log: postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device or address Will also occasionally get

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device

Larry Rosenman wrote: Reid Thompson wrote: Using a legacy installation ( 7.2.3 ). Occasionally the system will reach a state where attempted psql connection attempts fail, with the following error in the postgresql log: postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: No such device or address Will

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster is starting but shutting when trying to connect (Windows)

Magnus Hagander wrote on 08.07.2006 06:21: This looks exactly like the issues we've seen with broken antivirus or personal firewall software. Make sure you don't have any such installed (actualy installed, not just enabled), and if you do try to uninstall them. If you don't, but had before,

[GENERAL] Postmaster is starting but shutting when trying to connect (Windows)

Hello, i have a PostgreSQL (8.1) installation for testing purposes which was running fine for several months now (Windows XP). I was working with it yesterday, and today after booting my computer and restarting the service (I'm starting the service manually, because I don't need the server

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster is starting but shutting when trying to connect (Windows)

On 07.07.2006 09:20 Thomas Kellerer wrote: Hello, i have a PostgreSQL (8.1) installation for testing purposes which was running fine for several months now (Windows XP). I was working with it yesterday, and today after booting my computer and restarting the service (I'm starting the service

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster is starting but shutting when trying to connect (Windows)

Hello, i have a PostgreSQL (8.1) installation for testing purposes which was running fine for several months now (Windows XP). I was working with it yesterday, and today after booting my computer and restarting the service (I'm starting the service manually, because I don't need the

[GENERAL] Postmaster shuts down after rebuilding database via psql

Title: Postmaster shuts down after rebuilding database via psql Hello, I experience following problem. I have postgreSQL installed on sparc10. During the day, I have to drop and create 100+ tables several times per day. After I do it in psql, quit it and run my application I get following

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster shuts down after rebuilding database via psql

Averbukh Stella [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: After database was recreated, I do the same ps command but the output is completely different. The main postmaster process is gone and there are couple of subprocesses that are still hanging there. Crashes of the main postmaster process are pretty

[GENERAL] Postmaster crashes after upgrade to 8.1.4!

Upgrading from 8.1.3 to 8.1.4, I compiled with the same configure flags, installed to a separate directory, shut down 8.1.3, copied the data directory over to the new 8.1.4 directory (cp -Rp), set my symlinks so that /usr/local/pgsql points to the new 8.1.4 directory, and fired it up. I ran some

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster crashes after upgrade to 8.1.4!

CG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2006-05-25 08:30:50.076 EDT LOG: server process (PID 32140) was terminated by signal 11 That should be leaving a core dump file (if not, restart the postmaster under ulimit -c unlimited). Get a stack trace with gdb to get some more info about what's going on.

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster crashes after upgrade to 8.1.4!

I didn't find a core dump. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong spot or for the wrong file. The file should be called core.32140, correct? ... I did a find / -name core* ... that found nothing useful. --- Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: CG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2006-05-25 08:30:50.076

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster crashes after upgrade to 8.1.4!

CG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't find a core dump. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong spot or for the wrong file. The file should be called core.32140, correct? ... I did a find / -name core* ... that found nothing useful. find / -name '*core*' would be more reliable. FreeBSD, for

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster crashes after upgrade to 8.1.4!

Okay, there was no core dump to be found. I had to revert back to 8.1.3 which seems to be running fine. I am /extremely/ thankful that there was no data corruption. I took a 24 hour old dumpfile of the database it was crashing on and I restored it to a similar AMD64 box (SunFire x2100 instead of

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

doubt on my mind. Regards Beh - Original Message - From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chun Yit(Chronos) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start Chun Yit\(Chronos\) [EMAIL PROTECTED

[GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Hi, my postgresql version 7.4.5 cannot start until this morning, when i check the log file, it give me this error this is part of my log file DEBUG: vacuuming "pg_catalog.pg_class"DEBUG: "pg_class": found 9823 removable, 1017 nonremovable row versions in 205 pagesDETAIL: 0 dead row

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Chun Yit(Chronos) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote saw from the log file, it's possible that server crash during vacuum process... Question : 1) what happen to my database server? what the error meaning? It looks like index pg_class_relname_nsp_index (which is an index on pg_class) is corrupted.

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But not sure why it reports the following error message (which looks like a post-commit cleanup caused error): DEBUG: AbortCurrentTransaction PANIC: cannot abort transaction 14135438, it was already committed I think this is an artifact of

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

4) how can i solve this problem? The base table pg_class should be ok(pg_class_oid_ind indicates both have the same cardinality). Try to reindex pg_class as the superuser. but not i not be able to reindex the table because i cannot start the postmaster. postmaster give me error every time

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But not sure why it reports the following error message (which looks like a post-commit cleanup caused error): DEBUG: AbortCurrentTransaction PANIC: cannot abort transaction 14135438, it was already committed I think this is an artifact of

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Chun Yit\(Chronos\) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: PANIC: btree_delete_page_redo: uninitialized right sibling LOG: startup process (PID 5043) was terminated by signal 6 LOG: aborting startup due to startup process failure That's pretty ugly :-(. I think your only hope to get out of it is to use

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster cannot start

Chun Yit(Chronos) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote postmaster give me error every time i try to start it LOG: redo starts at A/46315F50 PANIC: btree_delete_page_redo: uninitialized right sibling So the last resort I can think of is to use pg_resetxlog to pass the startup failure -- but no gaurantee

[GENERAL] Postmaster process on port 10000

Hi! We have a problem with our postmaster process, which normaly runs on port 5432. From time to time it spawns another process which listens on port 1 - which also happens to be the port for our own server. I don't find any configuration option which could cause this behaviour. Does

[GENERAL] Postmaster process on port 10000

Hi! We have a problem with our postmaster process, which normaly runs on port 5432. From time to time it spawns another process which listens on port 1 - which also happens to be the port for our own server. I don't find any configuration option which could cause this behaviour. Does anyone

Re: [GENERAL] Postmaster process on port 10000

Volker =?ISO-8859-1?Q?A=DFmann?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We have a problem with our postmaster process, which normaly runs on port 5432. From time to time it spawns another process which listens on port 1 - which also happens to be the port for our own server. I don't find any

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster services problem

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of liishyanSent: 19 April 2006 10:27To: pgsql-general@postgresql.orgSubject: [GENERAL] postmaster services problem Hi, Im having problem starting the postmaster service at my offices server now

[GENERAL] postmaster services problem

Hi, Im having problem starting the postmaster service at my offices server now. Everything works fine for a year. But today morning, the I was unable to log into the database server. When I tried to start the postmaster service, it says, The service started and stopped. Some

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Title: RE: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on hi, i noticed the script, and at places it says received fast shutdown request2006-04-10 10:25:05 IST%LOG: aborting any active transactions2006-04-10 10:25:05 IST%idleFATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command2006-04

FW: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Title: RE: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on hi, i noticed the script, and at places it says received fast shutdown request2006-04-10 10:25:05 IST%LOG: aborting any active transactions2006-04-10 10:25:05 IST%idleFATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command2006

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Title: RE: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on the scenario in which the above took place was somewhat like this we have a script to stop some of the processes running in the background. this script was run, and all the processes got stopped then another script will start

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 08:02:04PM +0530, surabhi.ahuja wrote: the scenario in which the above took place was somewhat like this we have a script to stop some of the processes running in the background. this script was run, and all the processes got stopped then another script will start

[GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

hi, is it possible for postmaster to go doen on its own? all what the logs say is FATAL: terminating connection dur to administrator's command. thanks, regards Surabhi

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

It's not normal. What's the installation? OS, applications connecting to the server, etc. On Apr 7, 2006, at 8:20 AM, surabhi.ahuja wrote:hi, is it possible for postmaster to go doen on its own?   all what the logs say is FATAL: terminating connection dur to administrator's command.   thanks,

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

surabhi.ahuja wrote: hi, is it possible for postmaster to go doen on its own? all what the logs say is FATAL: terminating connection dur to administrator's command. Someone or something is issuing a kill command. It couldn't be the infamous Linux out-of-memory handler, could it? Check your

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com writes: surabhi.ahuja wrote: hi, is it possible for postmaster to go doen on its own? all what the logs say is FATAL: terminating connection dur to administrator's command. Someone or something is issuing a kill command. It couldn't be the infamous Linux

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Douglas McNaught wrote: Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com writes: surabhi.ahuja wrote: hi, is it possible for postmaster to go doen on its own? all what the logs say is FATAL: terminating connection dur to administrator's command. Someone or something is issuing a kill command. It couldn't be

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 03:03:09PM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote: I'm not sure it's that--the OOM killer uses SIGKILL which would take down the server before it could write that log entry. Hmm... (tests it) you're right. What would be sending SIGTERM to a backend? The only other thing I've

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 03:03:09PM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote: What would be sending SIGTERM to a backend? The only other thing I've ever heard of is some systems do a sigterm when you pass a quota limit? Could be. The actual standard use of

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 03:03:09PM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote: What would be sending SIGTERM to a backend? The only other thing I've ever heard of is some systems do a sigterm when you pass a quota limit?

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster going down own its on

Douglas McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Could be. The actual standard use of SIGTERM is to kill processes belonging to your terminal process group when you log out. I thought that was SIGHUP? Doh. Not enough caffeine absorbed yet. As penance, here's a

Re: [GENERAL] postmaster crash

Steve Oualline wrote: We have an interesting problem here. We have a server at a customer's site on which the database will not come up. Because of the nature of the product we make, we don't turn on Postgresql logs, so no log data is avaliable. That's the biggest problem you've got right

[GENERAL] postmaster startup time

Title: postmaster startup time What is the maximum time it takes for postmaster to start? Postmaster takes some time to open it's connections, process any WAL entries, and start accepting connections. What's the longest time you'd expect between the execution of the postmaster command

  1   2   3   >