| From: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: file-locking and postmaster.pid |
| Date: | 2006-05-23 16:10:27 |
| Message-ID: | 200605231810.27883.andreak@officenet.no |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 23 May 2006 17:54, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no> writes:
> > I've experienced several times that PG has died somehow and the
> > postmaster.pid file still exists 'cause PG hasn't had the ability to
> > delete it upon proper shutdown. Upon start-up, after such an incidence,
> > PG tells me another PG is running and that I either have to shut down the
> > other instance, or delete the postmaster.pid file if there really isn't
> > an instance running. This seems totally unnecessary to me.
>
> The postmaster does check to see whether the PID mentioned in the file
> is still alive, so it's not that easy for the above to happen. If you
> can provide details of a scenario where a failure is likely, we'd like
> to know about it. Also, what PG version are you talking about?
I have experienced this with PG-8.1.3 and will provide details if I can make
it happen. Basically it has happened when I have had to "hard-reset" my
laptop due to some strange bugs in Linux which have made it hang.
> > Why doesn't PG use file-locking to tell if another
> > PG is running or not?
>
> Portability.
Ok.
--
Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no>
Senior Software Developer / Manager
gpg public_key: http://dev.officenet.no/~andreak/public_key.asc
------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
OfficeNet AS | The most difficult thing in the world is to |
Hoffsveien 17 | know how to do a thing and to watch |
PO. Box 425 Skøyen | somebody else doing it wrong, without |
0213 Oslo | comment. |
NORWAY | |
Phone : +47 22 13 01 00 | |
Direct: +47 22 13 10 03 | |
Mobile: +47 909 56 963 | |
------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc Munro | 2006-05-23 16:10:36 | Re: New feature proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-23 16:05:34 | Re: Further reduction of bufmgr lock contention |