From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: gcc 4.6 and hot standby |
Date: | 2011-06-08 18:58:17 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTik55wN_urFw=RU9EbQU1-ZApxGD3Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:49, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> So I've been delaying moving some production boxes over to 9.0.4 from
>> 2011-06-08 11:41:03 MDT [6078]: [1-1] user= FATAL: terminating
>> walreceiver process due to administrator command
>> [ repeats... ]
>
>> I suppose the next step is to narrow it down to a specific flag -O2
>> uses... But I thought I would post here first-- maybe someone else has
>> hit this? Or maybe someone has a bright idea on how to narrow this
>> down?
>
> Maybe using a "prerelease" gcc version isn't such a hot idea for
> production. It's very, very, very difficult to see how the behavior you
> describe isn't a compiler bug.
Yeah :-). However ill note it looks like its the default compiler for
fedora 15, ubuntu natty and debian sid.
> It might be useful to strace the postmaster and walreceiver processes
> just to see if any signal is actually being sent or received.
Will do.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-06-08 19:05:09 | Re: gcc 4.6 and hot standby |
Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2011-06-08 18:52:50 | Re: gcc 4.6 and hot standby |