From: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "'pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: killing process question |
Date: | 2002-09-19 20:41:09 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0209192136490.599-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Johnson, Shaunn" <SJohnson6(at)bcbsm(dot)com> writes:
> > --generally speaking, how long should this run?
>
> > (gdb) attach 3488
> > Attaching to program: /usr/bin/postgres, process 3488
>
> Not very long --- it takes a couple seconds, for me, on a machine that's
> not fast by today's standards.
>
> > --i know i should be patient, but i'm trying to figure
> > --out if this should take more than 20 minutes or if
> > --i've done something wrong. (OR, should that be postmaster
> > --and not postgres in the above line?)
>
> postgres is correct. But are you sure that you are pointing to the same
> postgres executable that the process is running? Perhaps gdb could get
> confused if you point to the wrong version.
Another shot in the dark - could the process have blocked the relevent signal
(SIGTRAP) sent by the debugger?
--
Nigel J. Andrews
Director
---
Logictree Systems Limited
Computer Consultants
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-19 20:58:01 | Re: Debugging the backend? |
Previous Message | Oliver Elphick | 2002-09-19 18:45:14 | Re: Debugging the backend? |