Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Avoid 0-length memcpy to NULL with EXEC_BACKEND
- 95219c020c3c 17.0 landed
- f3412a61f3f9 18.0 landed
-
Tighten check for --forkchild argument when spawning child process
- 1906b1e0ad96 17.0 landed
- a06e8f84a1ac 18.0 landed
-
Add missing PGDLLIMPORT markings
- 768ceeeaa127 17.0 cited
-
Remove assertions that some compiler say are tautological
- d63d486d6c39 17.0 landed
-
Move code for backend startup to separate file
- 05c3980e7f47 17.0 landed
-
Refactor postmaster child process launching
- aafc05de1bf5 17.0 landed
-
Move some functions from postmaster.c to a new source file
- f1baed18bc3d 17.0 landed
-
Split registration of Win32 deadchild callback to separate function
- 14cddee9cce3 17.0 landed
-
Improve log messages referring to background worker processes
- a3f349c61292 17.0 landed
-
Move initialization of the Port struct to the child process
- 4945e4ed4a72 17.0 landed
-
Pass CAC as an argument to the backend process
- d162c3a73bf1 17.0 landed
-
Set socket options in child process after forking
- 73f7fb2a4c44 17.0 landed
-
Fix references to renamed function in comments
- ef4cfdce0ef8 17.0 landed
-
Use MyBackendType in more places to check what process this is
- 393b5599e517 17.0 landed
-
Remove MyAuxProcType, use MyBackendType instead
- 067701f57758 17.0 landed
-
Replace BackendIds with 0-based ProcNumbers
- 024c52111757 17.0 landed
-
Redefine backend ID to be an index into the proc array
- ab355e3a88de 17.0 landed
-
Remove superfluous 'pgprocno' field from PGPROC
- 28f3915b73f7 17.0 landed
-
Fix incorrect comment on how BackendStatusArray is indexed
- 28215a32b515 14.11 landed
- 90ccc9bf90a9 15.6 landed
- 4cf9ef670e4c 16.2 landed
- 2b53a462cff0 17.0 landed
-
Refactor how InitProcess is called
- fd5e8b440dfd 17.0 landed
-
Pass BackgroundWorker entry in the parameter file in EXEC_BACKEND mode
- 388491f1e5e6 17.0 landed
-
Refactor CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores
- 69d903367cde 17.0 landed
-
Silence Valgrind complaint with EXEC_BACKEND
- b19890d49d12 17.0 landed
-
Adjust obsolete comment explaining set_stack_base().
- cf84755575d1 16.2 landed
- 3b51265ee307 17.0 landed
-
Print lwlock stats also for aux processes, when built with LWLOCK_STATS
- f93133a250c6 17.0 landed
-
Move canAcceptConnections check from ProcessStartupPacket to caller.
- 16671ba6e717 17.0 landed
-
Fix crash on syslogger startup
- 5da0a622e889 17.0 landed
-
Refactor ListenSocket array.
- e29c46439511 17.0 landed
-
Use FD_CLOEXEC on ListenSockets
- b0bea38705b2 17.0 landed
-
Don't leak descriptors into subprograms.
- 1da569ca1f1f 16.0 cited
-
Use WaitEventSet API for postmaster's event loop.
- 7389aad63666 16.0 cited
-
Rearrange postmaster's startup sequence for better syslogger results.
- 9a86f03b4e8c 13.0 cited
-
Fix and enhance the assertion of no palloc's in a critical section.
- 1c6821be31f9 9.5.0 cited
Hi, On 2023-12-01 01:36:13 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 30/11/2023 22:26, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2023-11-30 01:36:25 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > > From a96b6e92fdeaa947bf32774c425419b8f987b8e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi> > > > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 00:01:25 +0200 > > > Subject: [PATCH v3 1/7] Refactor CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores > > > > > > For clarity, have separate functions for *creating* the shared memory > > > and semaphores at postmaster or single-user backend startup, and > > > for *attaching* to existing shared memory structures in EXEC_BACKEND > > > case. CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores() is now called only at > > > postmaster startup, and a new AttachSharedMemoryStructs() function is > > > called at backend startup in EXEC_BACKEND mode. > > > > I assume CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores() is still called during crash > > restart? > > Yes. > > > I wonder if it shouldn't split three ways: > > 1) create > > 2) initialize > > 3) attach > > Why? What would be the difference between create and initialize phases? Mainly because I somehow mis-remembered how we deal with the shared memory allocation when crashing. I somehow had remembered that we reused the same allocation across restarts, but reinitialized it from scratch. There's a kernel of truth to that, because we can end up re-attaching to an existing sysv shared memory segment. But not more. Perhaps I was confusing things with the listen sockets? Andres