Re: assertion at postmaster start - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: assertion at postmaster start
Date
Msg-id 20190828144358.GA30334@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: assertion at postmaster start  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Aug-26, Tom Lane wrote:

> I wrote:
> > I propose the attached.  I'm inclined to think that the risk/benefit
> > of back-patching this is not very good, so I just want to stick it in
> > HEAD, unless somebody can explain why dead_end children are likely to
> > crash in the field.
> 
> Pushed at ee3278239.
> 
> I'm still curious as to the explanation for a dead_end child exiting
> with code 15, but I have no way to pursue the point.

Many thanks for all the investigation and fix!

Sadly, I have *no* idea what could have happened that would have caused
a connection at that point (my start scripts don't do it).  It is
possible that I had a terminal running some shell loop on psql ("watch
psql -c something" perhaps).  But I'm sure I didn't notice that when I
reported this, or I would have mentioned it.  However, I have no idea
why would it have died with code 15.  From my notes of what I was doing
that day, I can't find any evidence that I would have had anything in
shared_preload_libraries.  (I don't have Frost's complete timestamped
shell history, however.)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Improve error detections in TAP tests by spreading safe_psql
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Improve base backup protocol documentation