Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Taral
Subject Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.10.9905052049500.1871-100000@dragon.taral.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load  (Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>)
Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 5 May 1999, Tom Lane wrote:

> Nope, that theory is all wet --- the backend definitely does 
> PS_SET_STATUS("idle") before it waits for a query.  Something is
> *really* peculiar here, since your backtrace shows that the backend
> has reached the point of waiting for client input.  It is not possible
> to get there without having done PS_SET_STATUS.  So why does the process
> still show up as "(postmaster)" in ps?  Something is flaky about your
> system's support of ps status setting, I think.

You never altered the task_struct, and so it's still 'postmaster' there.
Note the W... the process is paged out, so the argv is not available!

Taral



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] posmaster failed under high load
Next
From: Wayne Piekarski
Date:
Subject: Re: INSERT/UPDATE waiting (another example)