Re: postmaster respawn....? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: postmaster respawn....?
Date
Msg-id 29968.1030715470@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to postmaster respawn....?  (jerome <jerome@gmanmi.tv>)
List pgsql-general
jerome <jerome@gmanmi.tv> writes:
> im sure there is only one postmaster running on my server but everytime i do
> a series of ps ax | grep post..

> **2nd ps
>   510 ?        R      4:26 /usr/bin/postmaster -o -F -i
>  1235 ?        S    119:15 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
>  1394 ?        S     74:00 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
>  1422 ?        S      1:40 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
> 30626 ?        S      0:00 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
> 30632 ?        S      0:00 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
>   443 ?        S      0:00 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
>   449 ?        S      0:00 /usr/bin/postgres localhost nsadmin openacs idle
>  1971 ?        R      0:00 /usr/bin/postmaster -o -F -i

It would be more clear what was happening if you used ps flags that
would include the parent process ID in the listing.  My guess is that
process 1971 is a newly-forked backend that hasn't had a chance to
change its ps display yet.  However, the window for that is pretty durn
short, so it's surprising that you'd see this on any regular basis.

If 1971 is not a child of 510 but of someone else, then you've got
trouble --- but finding out who the someone else is would be the first
step towards understanding the issue anyway.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Thomas O'Dowd
Date:
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Selecting Varchar range (through JDBC).
Next
From: "Henshall, Stuart - WCP"
Date:
Subject: Re: Access 'field too long' error