Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1. - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.
Date
Msg-id 45A7C08F.90309@hagander.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Actually, it could still be the same problem, with the AV software only
>>> involved to the extent that it's trying to scan files for viruses.
>
>> Partially the same, but I've seen AV software keeping it open for
>> hours... Basically until reboot.
>
> Well, the bug report that just went by proves there's another problem:
>
> : select version();
> :
> : "PostgreSQL 8.2.1 on i686-pc-mingw32, compiled by GCC gcc.exe (GCC)
> : 3.4.2 (mingw-special)"
> :
> : pg_log:
> :
> : 2007-01-12 17:23:16 PANIC:  could not open control file
> : "global/pg_control": Permission denied
>
> pg_control is certainly not ever deleted or renamed, and in fact I
> believe there's an LWLock enforcing that only one PG process at a time
> is even touching it.  So we need another theory to explain this one :-(
> ... anyone have a better one than "Windows is a piece of junk"?

Right. What we need is a list of which processes have handles open to
the file, which can be dumped using Process Explorer (there are other
sysinternals tools to do it as well, but PE is probably the easiest)-

//Magnus

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Stéphane Schildknecht
Date:
Subject: FK Constraint on index not PK
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.