Re: Hot Standby conflict resolution handling
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Hot Standby conflict resolution handling |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130117104744.GA4314@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Hot Standby conflict resolution handling (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-01-17 01:38:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > But having said that ... are we sure this code is not actually broken? > ISTM that if we dare not interrupt for fear of confusing OpenSSL, we > cannot safely attempt to send an error message to the client either; > but ereport(FATAL) will try exactly that. You're absolutely right. ISTM, to fix it we would have to either provide a COMERROR like facility for FATAL errors or just remove the requirement of raising an error exactly there. If I remember what I tried before correctly the latter seems to involve setting openssl into nonblocking mode and check for the saved error in the EINTR loop in be-secure and re-raise the error from there. Do we want to backport either - there hasn't been any report that I could link to it right now, but on the other hand it could possibly cause rather ugly problems (data leakage, segfaults, code execution aren't all that improbable)? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: