| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Martin A(dot) Marques" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: database died |
| Date: | 2001-03-14 22:10:34 |
| Message-ID: | 9667.984607834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Martin A. Marques" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> writes:
>> I agree. Dying if the startup subjob fails is one thing, but dying
>> because a routine checkpoint fails is another. The code is treating
>> those two cases alike however ... will change it.
> Just happend again. At this moment the postgres on that machine is not in
> production, but should be in a short future. Is there a chance of getting
> some kind of patch, or maybe changing some configuratin parameters of the OS
> or the postmaster?
The fix is in CVS, pull it out if you need it:
http://www.postgresql.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kaare Rasmussen | 2001-03-14 22:53:53 | Re: Re: Week number |
| Previous Message | Martin A. Marques | 2001-03-14 21:11:01 | Re: database died |