Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs

From: "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs
Date: 2004-11-09 23:28:01
Message-ID: 200411091628.01401.pgsql@bluepolka.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday November 9 2004 1:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The shared memory block would certainly not still exist after a system
> >> reboot, so what we have here is a misleading error message. Looking
> >> at the code, the most plausible explanation appears to be that
> >> shmctl(IPC_STAT) is failing (which it ought to) and returning some
> >> errno code different from EINVAL (which is the case we are expecting
> >> to see).
>
> I believe the attached patch will fix this problem for you, at least on
> the assumption that you are starting only one postmaster at system boot.

Just realizing we do start multiple postmasters under same user id when
upgrading a cluster (one on old port, one on new).

I noticed that ipcs on my linux box has a command-line option to list the
pid that created the segment. Not sure if such a library exists in usable
form, but looking for segments owned by the downed postmaster's pid would
seem to be what is needed. Just a thought...

Ed

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-11-09 23:35:34 Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs
Previous Message John White 2004-11-09 23:00:57 The classic "NEW used in query that is not in a rule" problem again

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-11-09 23:35:34 Re: server auto-restarts and ipcs
Previous Message Steve Crawford 2004-11-09 22:56:54 Re: CVS should die (was: Possible make_oidjoins_check ...)