Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
Date: 1999-05-05 15:07:13
Message-ID: 2740.925916833@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
>> I'm not sure what would block a new backend for many minutes before
>> it did that, however. Can you attach to one of these processes with
>> a debugger and get a backtrace to show what it's doing?

> Below some output from ps and attached backtrace of one postmaster
> process.

Hmm, that backend is quite obviously done with initialization and
waiting for a client command. So why doesn't it show up as
"postgres ... idle" in ps?

I wonder whether we have the ps-info-setting operation in the wrong
place, ie at the bottom of the loop instead of the top, so that a
backend that hasn't yet received its first client command will never
have set the ps data. Will take a look.

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-05-05 15:17:27 Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-05-05 14:56:57 Re: [HACKERS] numeric data type on 6.5