Re: Recovery control functions
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Recovery control functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D30414E.8030509@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Recovery control functions (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Recovery control functions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 14.01.2011 14:18, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 14:08 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> On 14.01.2011 14:01, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 13:47 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >>>> On 14.01.2011 13:15, Simon Riggs wrote: >>>>> /* >>>>> + * Recheck shared recoveryPause by polling. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * XXX It might seem we should do this via a shared Latch, but >>>>> + * currently we only support one shared latch per process and >>>>> + * that is already taken for Startup process. Polling is used >>>>> + * in other places in xlog.c already, so not a concern. >>>>> + */ >>>> >>>> There is no such limitation with latches. >>> >>> SIGUSR1 handler can only handle one shared latch >> >> You can only *wait* for one latch at a time, but you can own more than >> that. AFAICS you would never need to wait for the recovery-pause-latch >> at the same time as the other latch. > > Yes, I understand. > > Trouble is, if you wait on Latch X and other processes send wakeup > assuming you were waiting on Latch Y, then this will erroneously wake > you up. The signal will wake up the process, but WaitLatch will quickly go back to sleep if it wasn't for the latch we're waiting for. I don't think that causes any meaningful performance issues. So that's all handled within the latch code. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: