| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tf(at)o(dot)ptimized(dot)com> |
| 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 18:20:02 |
| Message-ID: | 4665.1168107602@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Thomas F. O'Connell" <tf(at)o(dot)ptimized(dot)com> writes:
>> 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?
> 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?
The point is that when you eventually shut down and restart the
postmaster, it'd fail then ... perhaps long after you've forgotten
about your configuration changes, so it might be a bit mystifying.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John McCawley | 2007-01-06 19:13:06 | Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images |
| Previous Message | Thomas F. O'Connell | 2007-01-06 18:17:44 | Re: Database Corruption - last chance recovery options? |