Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25742.1204731065@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls ("Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@myyearbook.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls
Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@myyearbook.com> writes: > 2008-03-04 05:45:47 EST [6698]: [1-1] LOG: process 6698 still waiting for > AccessShareLock on relation 1247 of database 16385 after 1001.519 ms > 2008-03-04 05:45:47 EST [6698]: [2-1] STATEMENT: VACUUM FULL > autograph.autograph_creators > 2008-03-04 05:46:28 EST [6730]: [1-1] LOG: process 6730 still waiting for > AccessShareLock on relation 1247 of database 16385 after 1000.887 ms > 2008-03-04 05:46:28 EST [6730]: [2-1] STATEMENT: VACUUM FULL > lunchmoney.totals > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [3809]: [18-1] LOG: server process (PID 6742) was > terminated by signal 6: Aborted > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [3809]: [19-1] LOG: terminating any other active > server processes > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [6741]: [12-1] WARNING: terminating connection > because of crash of another server process How annoying ... the PANIC message doesn't seem to have reached the log. elog.c is careful to fflush(stderr) before abort(), so that isn't supposed to happen. But it looks like you are using syslog for logging (correct?) so maybe this is a problem with the syslog implementation you're using. What's the platform exactly? I wonder if it'd be reasonable to put a closelog() call just before the abort() ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: