pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedIs there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
14+ messages / 6 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-02 09:56 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-02 09:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background process may go down?
meaning the process getting stopped?
For example, can the wal sender process alone stop working? If it does so,
which part of the logs I must check to proceed further.
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-02 10:00 soumitra bhandary <soumitra.bhandary@hotmail.com>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: soumitra bhandary @ 2019-01-02 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; pgsql-admin
Hi ,
If wal sender process exceeds the max_wal_sender_timeout parameter value , it might stop sending the wal to the slave nodes . But will not die out . In this case you may notice no change in the wal location associated with wal sender process .
Please refer to the Postgres log for exact issue .
Thanks,
Soumitra
________________________________
From: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2019 3:26 PM
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background process may go down?
meaning the process getting stopped?
For example, can the wal sender process alone stop working? If it does so,
which part of the logs I must check to proceed further.
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-02 10:28 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: soumitra bhandary <soumitra.bhandary@hotmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-02 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Thanks Soumitra for your swift reply.
Can someone throw more light on a process - which might terminate or stop
responding?
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-02 15:50 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2019-01-02 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com> writes:
> Can someone throw more light on a process - which might terminate or stop
> responding?
*You* are the one who needs to throw more light; this question is too
vague to be usefully answerable. What symptoms are you seeing exactly?
Have you looked into the system monitoring views (e.g. pg_locks) to
see if there are relevant entries?
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Guide_to_reporting_problems
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 04:47 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-03 04:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Ok. Let me explain my use case from where I am asking this question,
For configuring Postgres Monitoring using a tool,
Is it enough if I just add the Postmaster process alone for Monitoring? or
Should I add all background processes for Monitoring?
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 06:24 Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Shreeyansh Dba @ 2019-01-03 06:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Hi Rajan,
Can you confirm which tool are you talking about?
Usually, we seen monitoring tools depend on the connection parameters, it
internally uses PostgreSQL background process.
Thanks & Regards,
*Shreeyansh DBA Team*
www.shreeyansh.com
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 10:18 AM rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok. Let me explain my use case from where I am asking this question,
>
> For configuring Postgres Monitoring using a tool,
> Is it enough if I just add the Postmaster process alone for Monitoring? or
> Should I add all background processes for Monitoring?
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Thanks,
> Rajan.
> --
> Sent from:
> http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 08:43 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-03 08:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
It is a custom script which we have developed for *monitoring the
processes(only)*. That is why I am asking if adding the postmaster alone
would suffice, or I should add all the background process names?
PS: These process checks are just to make sure that postgres is running.
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 10:27 Rajni Baliyan <saan654@gmail.com>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rajni Baliyan @ 2019-01-03 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
It depends what is the requirement.
If you just need to monitor whether Postgres is up and running then
monitoring postmaster will be sufficient but if you also want to monitor
other processes like autovacuum, wal sender etc then include corresponding
processes as well.
Regards
Rajni
On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 7:43 pm rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is a custom script which we have developed for *monitoring the
> processes(only)*. That is why I am asking if adding the postmaster alone
> would suffice, or I should add all the background process names?
>
> PS: These process checks are just to make sure that postgres is running.
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Thanks,
> Rajan.
> --
> Sent from:
> http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
>
> --
Thanks
Regards,
Rajni
0410472086
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 10:51 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: Rajni Baliyan <saan654@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-03 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
All,
Thanks for the replies. But let me ask the question like this,
Should I add all background processes for monitoring? Or adding the
postmaster only is sufficient?
It is like, is there a possibility that one of the background processes may
go down? Did someone face a situation like that?
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-03 17:36 Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Shreeyansh Dba @ 2019-01-03 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Hi Rajan,
A postgres server process (postmaster) is the main key process acts as
supervisor. If any background process gets die/down, then postmaster
automatically restarts this process.
Thanks & Regards,
*Shreeyansh DBA Team*
www.shreeyansh.com
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 4:21 PM rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> Thanks for the replies. But let me ask the question like this,
>
> Should I add all background processes for monitoring? Or adding the
> postmaster only is sufficient?
>
> It is like, is there a possibility that one of the background processes may
> go down? Did someone face a situation like that?
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Thanks,
> Rajan.
> --
> Sent from:
> http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-04 12:36 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-04 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Oh. That's great, Shreeyansh. Have you seen that working?
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-04 13:48 Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Shreeyansh Dba @ 2019-01-04 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Yes, we have tested.
Thanks & Regards,
*Shreeyansh DBA Team*
www.shreeyansh.com
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 6:06 PM rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh. That's great, Shreeyansh. Have you seen that working?
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Thanks,
> Rajan.
> --
> Sent from:
> http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-05 16:39 rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
parent: Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: rajan @ 2019-01-05 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
great news! Thanks Shreeyansh.
-----
--
Thanks,
Rajan.
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down?
@ 2019-01-07 20:30 Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
parent: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Laurenz Albe @ 2019-01-07 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>; pgsql-admin
rajan wrote:
> Ok. Let me explain my use case from where I am asking this question,
>
> For configuring Postgres Monitoring using a tool,
> Is it enough if I just add the Postmaster process alone for Monitoring? or
> Should I add all background processes for Monitoring?
I'd have the monitoring tool establish a database connection regularly.
If that works, and you can run a simple SELECT, things look good.
Other than that, the best you can do is monitor the database log file
for nasty messages like PANIC. Unfortunately there is no simple rule
to determine automatically which log entries are serious errors.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-01-07 20:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-01-02 09:56 Is there any way that one of the Postgres Background/Utility process may go down? rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-02 10:00 ` soumitra bhandary <soumitra.bhandary@hotmail.com>
2019-01-02 10:28 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-02 15:50 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2019-01-03 04:47 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-03 06:24 ` Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
2019-01-03 08:43 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-03 10:27 ` Rajni Baliyan <saan654@gmail.com>
2019-01-03 10:51 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-03 17:36 ` Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
2019-01-04 12:36 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-04 13:48 ` Shreeyansh Dba <shreeyansh2014@gmail.com>
2019-01-05 16:39 ` rajan <vgmonnet@gmail.com>
2019-01-07 20:30 ` Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox