Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup behavior on non-existent slot
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup behavior on non-existent slot |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170906095004.ldz7stfmaehflrfh@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup behavior on non-existent slot (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup behavior on non-existent slot
Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup behavior on non-existent slot |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote: > > Should the parent process of pg_basebackup be made to respond to SIGCHLD? > > Or call waitpid(bgchild, &status, WNOHANG) in some strategic loop? > > I think it's ok to just call waitpid() -- we don't need to react super > quickly, but we should react. Hmm, not sure about that ... in the normal case (slotname is correct) you'd be doing thousands of useless waitpid() system calls during the whole operation, no? I think it'd be better to have a SIGCHLD handler that sets a flag (just once), which can be quickly checked without accessing kernel space. > And we should then exit the main process with an error before actually > streaming everything. Right. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: