Re: [GENERAL] SSL connection has been closed unexpectedly

2013-08-15 Thread Stuart Ford
Guy No, we don't. It's also not happening on another platform which uses the same switch stack (and indeed VMWare cluster), so these aren't factors. Stuart On 15/08/2013 16:59, "Guy Helmer" wrote: >On Aug 15, 2013, at 5:41 AM, Stuart Ford wrote: > >> De

Re: [GENERAL] SSL connection has been closed unexpectedly

2013-08-15 Thread Stuart Ford
Alban I would agree with you, except it still happens even after I have disabled all SSL related stuff in postgresql.conf and pg_hba.conf. I've also no evidence of any out of memory events on the server. Stuart -- From: Alban Hertroys Date: Thursday, 15 August 2013 13:31 To: Stuart

[GENERAL] SSL connection has been closed unexpectedly

2013-08-15 Thread Stuart Ford
a what could be happening here? Many thanks in advance Stuart Ford This email and any attachments contain confidential and proprietary information of Glide Utilities Limited intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed. Unauthorised disclosure, copying or distribution of th

Re: [GENERAL] "soft lockup" in kernel

2013-07-05 Thread Stuart Ford
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Dennis Jenkins wrpte > Before I looked at your pastebin, I was going to ask "What kind of >storage > are the VMDKs on? If they are on NFS, iSCSI or FC, could the NAS/SAN be > experiencing a problem?" But I see in the stack trace that the kernel >thread > hung in "

[GENERAL] "soft lockup" in kernel

2013-07-05 Thread Stuart Ford
Dear community Twice today our PG 9.1 server has caused a "soft lockup", with a kernel message like this: [1813775.496127] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 73s! [postgres:18723] Full dmesg output - http://pastebin.com/YdWSmNUp The incidents were approximately two hours apart and the server wa

Re: [GENERAL] pg_largeobject.sql script not run after upgrade

2013-07-03 Thread Stuart Ford
On 24/06/2013 19:20, "Bruce Momjian" wrote: >On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 06:03:40PM +, Stuart Ford wrote: >> >> Do you know if not running this script would explain the fact that our >> dump file sizes have been much smaller than expected? >

Re: [GENERAL] pg_largeobject.sql script not run after upgrade

2013-06-24 Thread Stuart Ford
On 24/06/2013 17:18, "Bruce Momjian" wrote: >On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 03:25:44PM +, Stuart Ford wrote: >> On 24/06/2013 14:00, "Bruce Momjian" wrote: >> >> >> > >> >Looking further, here is the command that is executed: >> &

Re: [GENERAL] pg_largeobject.sql script not run after upgrade

2013-06-24 Thread Stuart Ford
On 24/06/2013 14:00, "Bruce Momjian" wrote: > >Looking further, here is the command that is executed: > > SELECT pg_catalog.lo_create(t.loid) > FROM (SELECT DISTINCT loid FROM pg_catalog.pg_largeobject) AS t; > >If you have created _new_ large objects since the upgrde, the script >mi

[GENERAL] pg_largeobject.sql script not run after upgrade

2013-06-24 Thread Stuart Ford
the time, my fault, it was at the end of a stressful migration evening. Is it safe to run this script now, a week in to using the upgraded database? Can this be done while the database is live? Would appreciate your advice. Stuart Ford This email and any attachments contain