Re: always forced restart after status 139?

On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Jason Williams wrote:

> We are using Postgres 7.1 on RedHat Linux 7.1.
>
> When calling a C function in a shared library (*.so), if you get a
> segmentation fault (status 139), the log indicates that the database will
> shut down and then restart in a few seconds.
>
> My question is, does this always have to happen? Is postgres capable of
> just logging the seg fault, but not affecting all the users on the database
> by restarting?

Because (the nature of) a SIGSEGV, you can't trust any data remaining in
memory - what if the crash was caused by corrupt data in memory?

This is why PostgreSQL completely shuts down, and re-starts back up.

Allowing any part of PostgreSQL to continue (especially since there's data
in SHM that's important) would be a bad idea, since you have no idea who
caused the SIGSEGV.

--
Dominic J. Eidson
"Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/