Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 7398.925950324@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
>> It's interesting, that process with pid 701 migrates from
>> (postmaster) to postgres with normal ps output !
> Yes, that's pretty strong evidence in favor of my theory (that these
> processes are just new backends that haven't received a command yet).
Nope, that theory is all wet --- the backend definitely does
PS_SET_STATUS("idle") before it waits for a query. Something is
*really* peculiar here, since your backtrace shows that the backend
has reached the point of waiting for client input. It is not possible
to get there without having done PS_SET_STATUS. So why does the process
still show up as "(postmaster)" in ps? Something is flaky about your
system's support of ps status setting, I think.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: