Re: [HACKERS] backend startup
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] backend startup |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4857.950082698@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | backend startup (Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> writes: > Is there any particular reason why a backend has to be started by the > postmaster unless it is the only backend running (in debug mode) ? If you don't have a postmaster then the backend is running standalone, which is not really the same environment as running in a live installation. It's OK for some kinds of debugging but I wouldn't trust it an inch for locking or resource-related issues. > (a) It would be more convenient to debug if you didn't have to shut down > the postmaster to run gdb postgres and... Say what? I've never yet shut down the postmaster to gdb anything; I tell gdb to "attach" to a running backend started by the postmaster. (See thread a couple weeks ago on exactly this point.) The major advantage of that way of working is you can use a reasonable client (psql or whatever floats your boat) instead of having to type queries directly at a backend that has no input-editing or command history support. There's also no question about whether you're running in a realistic environment or not. Finally, you can fire up an additional client+backend to examine the database even when you've got the backend under test stopped somewhere (so long as it's not stopped holding a spinlock or anything like that). If it weren't for the needs of initdb, I think standalone-backend mode would've gone the way of the dodo some time ago... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: