Re: BUG #15804: Assertion failure when using logging_collector withEXEC_BACKEND
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15804: Assertion failure when using logging_collector withEXEC_BACKEND |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190520015445.GF1923@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #15804: Assertion failure when using logging_collector with EXEC_BACKEND (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 01:07:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I've not worked that out in any detail; getting the switches included > properly might be too much of a pain for this to be an improvement. > But for sure I don't want there to be multiple copies of that list of > which subprocess types use shared memory. Getting rid of the process list dependency would be nice. > A variant idea is to include shared_memory_exists in what's passed down > by the BackendParameters mechanism, and then subprocesses can adjust > their behavior for themselves. I actually got to think about having extra switches to control the re-attachment of sub-processes when thinking about a solution, and I agree that it would be much cleaner. The idea about using backend parameters is interesting (I haven't considered it), though I feel that this could introduce race conditions as the process startup scheduling can cause tricky issues on Windows, so I think that this would make the system less robust. Using a state specific to the postmaster for the decision-making ensures a single entry point. > In any case, the thrust of all of this is that we shouldn't touch any > of the assertions in the shmem support files; rather, the way to fix > it is to improve the logic in postmaster.c so that we don't call those > functions at all in child processes that are launched before shmem > exists. I certainly agree with that. Those assertions are here to stay. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: