Re: server process (PID 2964738) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stefan Froehlich <postgresql(at)froehlich(dot)priv(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: server process (PID 2964738) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault
Date: 2022-11-07 14:02:26
Message-ID: 3192952.1667829746@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Stefan Froehlich <postgresql(at)froehlich(dot)priv(dot)at> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 08:17:10AM -0500, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>> On 11/7/22 06:19, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>>> Don't continue to work with that cluster even if everything seems OK now.
>>> "pg_dumpall" and restore to a new cluster on good hardware.

>> Why would that be necessary if the original machine works well now?

> I can understand the idea not to trust hardware anymore once a (not
> clearly identified) problem occured.

> In this case new hardware would - for reasons beyond the scope of
> this list - not be any more or less trustworthy than the existing
> one and thus (IMO) not make any difference.

Whether you want to continue to trust the hardware or not is your
call. It'd still be recommendable to pg_dumpall and restore into
a freshly-initdb'd cluster, because otherwise you can't be real
sure that you identified and cleared all the data corruption.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Froehlich 2022-11-07 14:05:04 Re: server process (PID 2964738) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault
Previous Message Stefan Froehlich 2022-11-07 13:47:10 Re: server process (PID 2964738) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault