7.2.2 bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Rod Taylor
Subject 7.2.2 bug?
Date
Msg-id 1031076239.43658.64.camel@jester
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: 7.2.2 bug?
List pgsql-hackers
Seems it wants to run a redo entry that doesn't exist.

Not a big deal as it's a test environment only.  It was recently
upgraded from 7.2.1 to 7.2.2.  I'm wondering whether the person who did
the upgrade shutdown the daemon before installing.



FATAL 1:  The database system is starting up
FATAL 1:  The database system is starting up
DEBUG:  database system is ready
DEBUG:  server process (pid 9084) was terminated by signal 10
DEBUG:  terminating any other active server processes
DEBUG:  all server processes terminated; reinitializing shared memory
and semaphores
DEBUG:  database system was interrupted at 2002-09-03 13:54:33 EDT
DEBUG:  checkpoint record is at 0/1E1F1D90
DEBUG:  redo record is at 0/1E1F1D90; undo record is at 0/0; shutdown
TRUE
DEBUG:  next transaction id: 320415; next oid: 488052
DEBUG:  database system was not properly shut down; automatic recovery
in progress
DEBUG:  ReadRecord: record with zero length at 0/1E1F1DD0
DEBUG:  redo is not required
FATAL 1:  The database system is starting up
FATAL 1:  The database system is starting up
DEBUG:  database system is ready
DEBUG:  server process (pid 9097) was terminated by signal 10
DEBUG:  terminating any other active server processes
DEBUG:  all server processes terminated; reinitializing shared memory
and semaphores
DEBUG:  database system was interrupted at 2002-09-03 13:54:37 EDT
DEBUG:  checkpoint record is at 0/1E1F1DD0
DEBUG:  redo record is at 0/1E1F1DD0; undo record is at 0/0; shutdown
TRUE
DEBUG:  next transaction id: 320415; next oid: 488052
DEBUG:  database system was not properly shut down; automatic recovery
in progress
DEBUG:  ReadRecord: record with zero length at 0/1E1F1E10
DEBUG:  redo is not required
FATAL 1:  The database system is starting up






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexandre Dulaunoy
Date:
Subject: Re: I am done
Next
From: Barry Lind
Date:
Subject: Re: possible vacuum improvement?