On Fri, 19 May 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Frost <jeff@frostconsultingllc.com> writes:
>> Do you think the postmaster on 5432 is trying to archive the other
>> postmaster's WAL files somehow?
>
> Not as long as they aren't in the same data directory ;-). What Simon
> was wondering about was whether an archiver process had somehow been
> left over from a previous incarnation of the test postmaster. The thing
> to do is look through "ps auxww" (or local equivalent) and see if you
> see more than one thing calling itself an archiver process.
>
> (Whether or not this explains Jeff's problem, it definitely seems like
> a failure mode that we need to guard against. We go to great lengths
> to prevent a new postmaster from starting when there are still live
> backends from a previous postmaster, but I don't think that interlock
> is effective for the archiver.)
Well now, will you look at this:
postgres 20228 1 0 May17 ? 00:00:00 postgres: archiver process
postgres 20573 1 0 May17 ? 00:00:00 postgres: archiver process
postgres 23817 23810 0 May17 pts/11 00:00:00 postgres: archiver process
23810 is the running postmaster:
postgres 23810 1 0 May17 pts/11 00:03:01 /usr/local/pgsql-8.1.3/bin/postm
do you think that got left around the last time I did a pg_ctl restart?
I guess I can stop my re-run of the test after stopping the /var/lib/pgsql
postmaster.
--
Jeff Frost, Owner <jeff@frostconsultingllc.com>
Frost Consulting, LLC http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908 FAX: 650-649-1954
