From: | Travis Hume <travis(dot)hume(at)tenzing(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jay O'Connor <joconnor(at)cybermesa(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Breck Thomas <Breck(dot)Thomas(at)tenzing(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: need a method to ping a running database |
Date: | 2003-06-12 00:16:10 |
Message-ID: | 3EE7C64A.2080203@tenzing.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Yes, of course that would be best, but I was expicitly testing
postgresql's ability to recover from power spikes and other harsh
failure scenarios. So far it hasn't missed a beat.
Jay O'Connor wrote:
>>It seems that if you start postgresql and then issue a "kill -9" on the
>>
>>
>postmaster processes a .pid file is left
>
>
>>behind (understandable), but then if you run "pg_ctl status" it will
>>immediately report that the database is running and give you the pid
>>number and whatever else. This is a bit misleading to say the least.
>>
>>
>
>First thoght is don't do "kill -9" other than the pid problem is the probem
>that postgresql caches data in memory and that could be a problem if you
>kill like that. Use pg_ctl stop -m fast or pg_ctl stop -m immediate
>
>Take care,
>Jay
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Edmund Dengler | 2003-06-12 00:17:35 | Re: Performance of query (fwd) |
Previous Message | Edmund Dengler | 2003-06-12 00:11:02 | Performance of a query |