Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gcuBx-0007Ec-PV for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 15:36:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gcuBw-0003cJ-Gq for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 15:36:52 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gcuBw-0003cB-AO for pgsql-sql@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 15:36:52 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gcuBt-0004ra-1s for pgsql-sql@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 15:36:51 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wBSFajBI021937; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 10:36:46 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: "=?utf-8?B?5qKB5Y2a?=" <12020405@qq.com> cc: "=?utf-8?B?cGdzcWwtc3Fs?=" Subject: Re: backend process was crashed when using zabbix monitor In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to "=?utf-8?B?5qKB5Y2a?=" <12020405@qq.com> message dated "Fri, 28 Dec 2018 18:31:51 +0800" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <21935.1546011405.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2018 10:36:45 -0500 Message-ID: <21936.1546011405@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk "=?utf-8?B?5qKB5Y2a?=" <12020405@qq.com> writes: > [ abort trap inside malloc_printerr ] It looks like glibc noticed corruption of malloc's data structures, which implies that something inside the server overwrote memory it shouldn't have ... but just where the bug is is impossible to say from this info. Do you use any other PG extensions besides pg_stat_statements? Our usual experience is that extensions have more bugs than the core server, though in any one case that could be wrong. It would be worth updating to current (9.6.11) just on general principles. I'm too lazy to check the release notes to see whether we fixed any memory-stomp bugs since 9.6.8, but we've certainly fixed many bugs since then. regards, tom lane