Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikfkVgcEZb4vt77gG78fL0AoU3_Y8O99FV391ef@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > Excerpts from Stefan Kaltenbrunner's message of mié may 12 15:10:28 -0400 2010: > >> the startup process has the following backtrace: >> >> (gdb) bt >> #0 0x00007fbe24cb2c83 in select () from /lib/libc.so.6 >> #1 0x00000000006e811a in pg_usleep () >> #2 0x000000000048c333 in XLogPageRead () >> #3 0x000000000048c967 in ReadRecord () >> #4 0x0000000000493ab6 in StartupXLOG () >> #5 0x0000000000495a88 in StartupProcessMain () >> #6 0x00000000004ab25e in AuxiliaryProcessMain () >> #7 0x00000000005d4a7d in StartChildProcess () >> #8 0x00000000005d70c2 in PostmasterMain () >> #9 0x000000000057d898 in main () > > I just noticed that we have some code assigning the return value of > time() to a pg_time_t variable. Is this supposed to work reliably? > (xlog.c lines 9267ff) I' -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: