Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>
>>FATAL: pre-existing shared memory block (key 5432001, ID 19202077) is
>>still in use
>>HINT: If you're sure there are no old server processes still running,
>>remove the shared memory block with the command "ipcclean", "ipcrm", or
>>just delete the file "postmaster.pid".
>
>
>>As we can see pg_ctl knows that the PID does not exist. If the PID does
>>not exist is it safe to assume that we can remove the file? So that we
>>may start again?
>
>
> The error message is warning you that there appear to still be live
> backends in the data directory, even though the original postmaster
> process is gone (crashed?).
Yes I am aware of that. My actual point was that pg_ctl test to see if
the process is alive when you issue the stop. It comes back with the
error that the PID is no longer available to kill.
I was just wondering if we could make pg_ctl a little smarter as all.
If pg_ctl can't start because the pid file exists, test for the
existence of the pid, if the pid does not exist test for the existence
of **any** postgres process (grep? egad...), if none exists overwrite
the pid file and start?
If that is the case, forcibly starting a
> new postmaster is a fine recipe for creating unrecoverable data
> corruption. So having pg_ctl auto-remove the file is horribly dangerous
> and is NOT going to happen.
Please understand my thought was not coming lightly. I recognize very
well (as I have had to deal with customers who have done it) the dangers
here.
>
> How did you get into this state anyway?
Power off on a dev machine ;)
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/