Re: archive_command failures report confusing exit status
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: archive_command failures report confusing exit status |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5832.1197403611@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: archive_command failures report confusing exit status (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: archive_command failures report confusing exit status
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > Am Dienstag, 11. Dezember 2007 schrieb Tom Lane: >> Doesn't this patch break the behavior that is documented in the comment? >> Specifically, the case where the restore_command dies on a signal and >> this is reported to us by the controlling shell as exitcode > 128. >> We want the archiver to die, but this patch makes it not do so. > AFAICT, the coding > WIFSIGNALED(rc) || WEXITSTATUS(rc) > 128 > is simply redundant, because a signal happened exactly when WIFSIGNALED(rc) is > true. No, you are confusing the cases "called shell was killed by a signal" and "called command was killed by a signal, which the shell then turned around and reported to us as exit > 128". > I have tested this: A single test case proves little. You need to consider race conditions and cases where the shell is ignoring the particular signal. I'm fairly certain that both of these exit statuses can happen in practice, at least with some shells/platforms. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: