From: | Grzegorz Tańczyk <goliatus(at)polzone(dot)pl> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Automatic recovery process |
Date: | 2005-12-28 13:13:14 |
Message-ID: | 18311082093.20051228141314@polzone.pl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hello Martijn,
Wednesday, December 28, 2005, 1:17:54 PM, you wrote:
MvO> > My question is about the last line. Does those connections slow down
MvO> > database startup process? Now it looks like that they do, because
MvO> > when I shutdown backend then database starts immediatel, but I'm not
MvO> > sure, so I would like to hear clear answer :-)
MvO> The problem is that after an unclean shutdown the database server has
MvO> to go through the transaction logs to recover the database. This can
MvO> take time and during that time new connections are rejected. I don't
MvO> think attempting to connect slows anything down materially.
So why after closing all connections database system starts up
immediately? This problem also occurs when backend starts up before
database system and there are connections pending. Always the best
solution is to restart backend. I use Excalibur Datasource component
on the backend for connection pooling.
MvO> I think you're missing the point though. The backend should not be
MvO> crashing. Unfortunatly you didn't show the actual log of when the
MvO> backend crashed so we can only speculate.
MvO> Look for something like
MvO> "exited with error code" or "signal".
LOG: server process (PID 22946) was terminated by signal 11
LOG: terminating any other active server processes
MvO> Do you have any C backend
MvO> "functions you defined yourself?
No, I don't have. I use only JDBC and pgAdmin to connect to database.
Thanks for answer.
--
Best regards,
Grzegorz mailto:goliatus(at)polzone(dot)pl
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | H.J. Sanders | 2005-12-28 13:15:24 | FW: deleted records |
Previous Message | Dmitry Panov | 2005-12-28 13:06:58 | Re: WAL logs multiplexing? |