Re: pgsql: Get rid of the dedicated latch for signaling the startup process
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Get rid of the dedicated latch for signaling the startup process |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3d3c42ca-c1bd-605d-71cf-8cd6353e895b@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Get rid of the dedicated latch for signaling the startup process (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Get rid of the dedicated latch for signaling the startup process
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
On 04/11/2020 15:17, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 04/11/2020 14:03, Fujii Masao wrote: >> Or ISTM that WakeupRecovery() should set the latch only when the latch >> has not been reset to NULL yet. > > Got to be careful with race conditions, if the latch is set to NULL at > the same time that WakeupRecovery() is called. I don't think commit 113d3591b8 got this quite right: > void > WakeupRecovery(void) > { > if (XLogCtl->recoveryWakeupLatch) > SetLatch(XLogCtl->recoveryWakeupLatch); > } If XLogCtl->recoveryWakeupLatch is set to NULL between the if and the SetLatch, you'll still get a segfault. That's highly unlikely to happen in practice because the compiler will optimize that into a single load instruction, but could happen with -O0. I think you'd need to do the access only once, using a volatile pointer, to make that safe. Maybe it's simpler to just not reset it to NULL, after all. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: