Re: Race conditions with checkpointer and shutdown
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-04-16T22:59:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 6:45 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Do we need to think harder about establishing rules for multiplexed > use of the process latch? I'm imagining some rule like "if you are > not the outermost event loop of a process, you do not get to > summarily clear MyLatch. Make sure to leave it set after waiting, > if there was any possibility that it was set by something other than > the specific event you're concerned with". Hmm, yeah. If the latch is left set, then the outer loop will just go through an extra and unnecessary iteration, which seems fine. If the latch is left clear, then the outer loop might miss a wakeup intended for it and hang forever. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
In walreceiver, don't try to do ereport() in a signal handler.
- ac8f2e1ef34f 10.9 landed
- 9346d396fd4a 11.4 landed
- a1a789eb5ac8 12.0 landed