From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Brandon Shalton" <brandon(at)cydataservices(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: disk filling up |
Date: | 2007-07-31 16:16:38 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150707310916pf0bc974t9f3d3d9b647555ba@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 7/31/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > third (but unlikely) possibility is there are various dropped tables,
> > etc which need to be deleted but there are stale postgresql processes
> > holding on to the fd. This would only happen following a postmaster
> > crash or some other bizarre scenario, but i've seen it on production
> > box.
>
> Brent Reid reported something similar in bug #3483 but I'm still quite
> unclear how it'd happen in any realistic scenario. Can you create a
> test case?
No, but I've seen it on a production 8.1 box (once). I didn't
actually cause the problem, just cleaned it up. It was unnoticed for
several weeks/months because the postmaster processes showed up
without a controlling tty.
My best guess is the postmaster was killed improperly out of haste
during a maintenance window, or possibly an out of disk space related
issue at an earlier point. I never really considered that it was a
postgresql problem.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sachchida Ojha | 2007-07-31 16:38:51 | Re: deadlock detected when calling function (Callfunction_name) |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-31 15:28:06 | Re: deadlock detected when calling function (Call function_name) |