Re: What is happening on buildfarm member crake?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member crake? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52E431AB.2080500@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member crake? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: What is happening on buildfarm member crake?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/19/2014 08:22 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > Hmm, that looks an awful lot like the SIGUSR1 signal handler is > getting called after we've already completed shmem_exit. And indeed > that seems like the sort of thing that would result in dying horribly > in just this way. The obvious fix seems to be to check > proc_exit_inprogress before doing anything that might touch shared > memory, but there are a lot of other SIGUSR1 handlers that don't do > that either. However, in those cases, the likely cause of a SIGUSR1 > would be a sinval catchup interrupt or a recovery conflict, which > aren't likely to be so far delayed that they arrive after we've > already disconnected from shared memory. But the dynamic background > workers stuff adds a new possible cause of SIGUSR1: the postmaster > letting us know that a child has started or died. And that could > happen even after we've detached shared memory. > Is anything happening about this? We're still getting quite a few of these: <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_failures.pl?max_days=3&member=crake> cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: