Re: Interrupts vs signals

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>

To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>

Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

Date: 2024-11-15T14:24:37Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

v4-0003-Use-proc-interrupt-for-bgworker-state-change-noti.patch (text/x-patch) patch v4-0003

Here is also a version of Thomas's "Use Latch for bgworker state change 
notification patch", rebased over the "Replace latches with Interrupts" 
patch.

I used INTERRUPT_GENERAL_WAKEUP for the notification, as a 
straightforward replacement of setting the latch, but I wonder if we 
should have a dedicated interrupt flag for this instead.

-- 
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)

Commits

Ignore SIGINT in walwriter and walsummarizer
- a92b809f9da1 19 (unreleased) landed
Split WaitEventSet functions to separate source file
- 393e0d231405 18.0 landed
Use ModifyWaitEvent to update exit_on_postmaster_death
- 84e5b2f07a5e 18.0 landed
Remove unused ShutdownLatchSupport() function
- a98e4dee63ce 18.0 landed
Rename two functions that wake up other processes
- 368d8270c838 18.0 landed
Use ProcNumbers instead of direct Latch pointers to address other procs
- a9c546a5a378 18.0 landed
Clean up WaitLatch calls that passed latch without WL_LATCH_SET
- f9ecb57a506a 18.0 landed
Remove unneeded #include
- 094ae071605d 18.0 landed
Remove unused latch
- 6c0c49f7d37d 18.0 landed
Remove support for background workers without BGWORKER_SHMEM_ACCESS.
- 80a8f95b3bca 15.0 cited