Re: [GENERAL] Unable to get postgres running after long time no vacuum
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Unable to get postgres running after long time no vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1280.1183912937@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Unable to get postgres running after long time no vacuum (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Unable to get postgres running after long time no vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Leon Mergen" <leon@solatis.com> writes: > On 7/8/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> It's actually not that easy to get out of the single-user mode without >> it doing a checkpoint. I suppose you must have either SIGQUIT or >> SIGKILL'd it. While there's nothing we can do about SIGKILL, it strikes >> me that it might be a good safety measure if single-user mode treated >> SIGQUIT the same as SIGTERM, ie, non-panic shutdown. Comments anyone? > What I found with SIGTERM was that it did nothing, since it was still > waiting for the (single-user) client to exit, and thus had no effect > unless I sent an end-of-input ctrl+d singal, which would have resulted > in a shutdown anyway. We might need a bit of rejiggering around the edges of the single-user command reading code to make this work nicely, but what I'm envisioning is that a keyboard-generated SIGQUIT ought to result in a clean shutdown, same as EOF does. At least on my machine there doesn't seem to be a defined way to generate SIGTERM from the terminal; so I can see where if someone hasn't read the postgres man page carefully, their first instinct upon finding that control-C doesn't get them out of single-user mode might be to type control-\ (or whatever the local QUIT character is). It doesn't seem like it should be quite that easy to force a panic stop. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: