Re: Latch for the WAL writer - further reducing idle wake-ups.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Latch for the WAL writer - further reducing idle wake-ups. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 530.1336520450@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Latch for the WAL writer - further reducing idle wake-ups. (Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 8 May 2012 22:35, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Now that I've actually read the patch, rather than just responding to >> your description of it, I find myself entirely unhappy with the proposed >> changes in the walwriter's sleep logic. �You have introduced race >> conditions (it is NOT okay to reset the latch somewhere below the top of >> the loop) > Yes, there is some checking of flags before the potential ResetLatch() > call, which may be acted on. The code there is almost identical to > that of the extant bgwriter code. Um, yes, I noticed that shortly after sending my previous message. I'm pretty unhappy about the current state of the bgwriter loop, too. I rather wonder whether that coding explains the "postmaster failed to shut down" errors that we've been seeing lately in the buildfarm. Not noticing a shutdown signal promptly would go a long way towards explaining that. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: