| From: | "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tf(at)o(dot)ptimized(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Best <mbest(at)pendragon(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Database Corruption - last chance recovery options? |
| Date: | 2007-01-06 18:17:44 |
| Message-ID: | 374DD2FA-E5FD-4BE8-85A0-6AB1A536E376@o.ptimized.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Jan 5, 2007, at 10:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Best <mbest(at)pendragon(dot)org> writes:
>> Set your memory requirement too high in postgresql.conf, reload
>> instead
>> of restarting the database, it silently fails sometime later?
>
> Yeah, wouldn't surprise me, since the reload is going to ignore any
> changes related to resizing shared memory. I think that 8.2 might
> warn
> you that it was ignoring the un-applyable changes, but the warnings
> would only go to the postmaster log, where they're easily missed :-(
Wait, now I'm curious. If a change in postgresql.conf that requires a
restart doesn't take effect on reload, then how could a related
failure manifest at all, regardless of when?
--
Thomas F. O'Connell
optimizing modern web applications
: for search engines, for usability, and for performance :
http://o.ptimized.com/
615-260-0005
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-06 18:20:02 | Re: Database Corruption - last chance recovery options? |
| Previous Message | Jeremy Haile | 2007-01-06 16:13:11 | Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images |