Re: BGWorkers, shared memory pointers, and postmaster restart
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BGWorkers, shared memory pointers, and postmaster restart |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140416112144.GD17874@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BGWorkers, shared memory pointers, and postmaster restart (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BGWorkers, shared memory pointers, and postmaster restart
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-04-16 19:11:37 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 04/16/2014 02:37 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > Hi all > > > > I've been using the dynamic BGWorker support for some recent work, and I > > think I've found an issue with how postmaster restarts are handled. > > > > TL;DR: I don't think there's a safe way to use a BGWorker (static or > > dynamic) with bgw_restart_time != BGW_NEVER_RESTART and a bgw_main_arg > > Datum that points into shared memory, and think we might need a API > > change to fix that. > > Andres sensibly points out that part of this is easily solved by passing > the bgworker an index into an array in a named shmem block. A simple > pass-by-value Datum that can be turned into a pointer to a shmem struct. > > This still doesn't solve the other half of the issue, which is how to > handle dynamic bgworkers after a postmaster restart. They're effectively > lost/leaked: there's no way to retain a bgworker handle across restart, > and no way to list bgworkers, nor is there any idempotent way to say > "Start a worker to do <x> only if it doesn't already exist" (unique > names, magic cookie hashes, whatever). > > With the current API the only solution to the second half that I see is > to have bgworkers run in non-restart mode and manage them yourself. Not > ideal. > > Instead we need one of: > > - A flag like BGW_UNREGISTER_ON_RESTART; > > - To always unregister dynamic bgws on postmaster shm clear + restart; > > - A way to list bgws, inspect their BackgroundWorker structs and obtain > their handles; or > > - A way to idempotently register a bgw only if it doesn't already exist I think we should go for always unregistering dynamic bgws. There's really little justification for keeping them around after a crash cycle. While not the nicest place architecturally, it seems easy enough to do in BackgroundWorkerShmemInit() which happens to be called conveniently in a crash/restart cycle... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: