Re: Something fishy happening on frogmouth
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Something fishy happening on frogmouth |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 527223E8.2020207@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Something fishy happening on frogmouth (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Something fishy happening on frogmouth
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 30.10.2013 18:52, Robert Haas wrote: > Here's a short summary of what I posted back in August: at system > startup time, the postmaster creates one dynamic shared segment, > called the control segment. That segment sticks around for the > lifetime of the server and records the identity of any *other* dynamic > shared memory segments that are subsequently created. If the server > dies a horrible death (e.g. kill -9), the next postmaster will find > the previous control segment (whose ID is written to a file in the > data directory) and remove any leftover shared memory segments from > the previous run; without this, such segments would live until the > next server reboot unless manually removed by the user (which isn't > even practical on all platforms; e.g. there doesn't seem to be any way > to list all exstant POSIX shared memory segments on MacOS X, so a user > wouldn't know which segments to remove). Wait, that sounds horrible. If you kill -9 the server, and then rm -rf $PGDATA, the shared memory segment is leaked until next reboot? I find that unacceptable. There are many scenarios where you never restart postmaster after a crash. For example, if you have an automatic failover setup; you fail over to the standby in case of crash, and re-initialize the old master with e.g rsync. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: