Re: Stefan's bug (was: max_standby_delay considered harmful)
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Date: 2010-05-18T08:10:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 16:05 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >>> >> ISTM that we can use XLogCtl->SharedRecoveryInProgress for that. > >>> >> Is this OK? > >>> > > >>> > That can change state at any time. Would that work? > >>> > >>> Yes. XLogCtl->SharedRecoveryInProgress is set to TRUE only when > >>> XLogCtl structure is initialized (i.e., XLOGShmemInit), and it's > >>> set to FALSE only at the end of recovery. > >> > >> You should be using RecoveryInProgress() > > > > Isn't access to a bool variable atomic? > > If it's not atomic, I'll add the following comment into CancelBackup(): > > Don't bother with lock to access XLogCtl->SharedRecoveryInProgress, > because there should be no other processes running when this code > is reached. Call it via a function. There is no need for postmaster to know the innards of xlog.c, which could change in future. Modularity. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com