From: | Rainer Tammer <pgsql(at)spg(dot)schulergroup(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres 9.2.13 on AIX 7.1 |
Date: | 2021-08-26 06:45:36 |
Message-ID: | 149143df-11c1-4020-2b78-5d8a469eefe8@spg.schulergroup.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hello,
OK, I'll try to find out which process is sending the SIGINT.
Bye
Rainer
On 25.08.2021 18:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rainer Tammer <pgsql(at)spg(dot)schulergroup(dot)com> writes:
>> It did run the server with auto vacuum disabled for ~ 24h - no server
>> shutdown.
>> After re-enabling auto vacuum the server dies in less then 9 hours:
> This is just speculation, but it fits the reported facts: somewhere
> you've got something that tries to limit the resources consumed by
> a background process, and when it decides the limit is exhausted
> then it sends SIGINT. Without autovacuum waking up every so often,
> the time for PG-as-a-whole to hit the hypothetical limit would be
> much longer.
>
>> Would it be worth adding additional code before every signal to trace
>> the source ID and the target PID as well as the source/target process name?
> I will be *mightily* astonished if the signal is coming from
> within PG. The more so since it appears to be happening while
> the instance is entirely idle.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-08-26 07:21:51 | Re: BUG #17157: authorizaiton of dict_int and bloom extention |
Previous Message | Anupam Pandey | 2021-08-26 05:54:49 | Issue/Abnormality found. |