Re: could not write to log -> PANIC -> System down - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Brandon Aiken
Subject Re: could not write to log -> PANIC -> System down
Date
Msg-id F8E84F0F56445B4CB39E019EF67DACBA401667@exchsrvr.winemantech.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: could not write to log -> PANIC -> System down  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Responses Re: could not write to log -> PANIC -> System down  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-general
My understanding of VSS is that only one non-VSS aware app can access
the data at any one time.  All I meant was that if their NetBackup
version was old that they probably cannot benefit from VSS since I doubt
the Win32 PG port knows about it either.

Brandon Aiken

-----Original Message-----
From: Martijn van Oosterhout [mailto:kleptog@svana.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 5:23 PM
To: Brandon Aiken
Cc: Merlin Moncure; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] could not write to log -> PANIC -> System down

On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 05:13:30PM -0500, Brandon Aiken wrote:
> Of course, it's Windows.  "Should not" is often a suggestion, it
seems.
> As a port, postmaster.exe was presumably not written with VSS in mind,
> so it might object to the shadow copy instantiation (which, again, it
> *should* not be able to do).

Any backup system that is not transparent to processes running on the
system seems to be flawed by design.

> No idea on the frequent autovacuuming.  Do you do a lot of deletes?

In those messages "processing" just means it woke up to see if there
was anything to do. It probably didn't do anything. Waking up every
minute is not that big a deal...

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability
to litigate.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Rafal Pietrak
Date:
Subject: Re: about the RULE system
Next
From: "Gurjeet Singh"
Date:
Subject: Re: a question for the way-back machine