Re: Can a child process detect postmaster death when in pg_usleep?
От | Bharath Rupireddy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Can a child process detect postmaster death when in pg_usleep? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALj2ACV68cP1ck_KkoPBcoh7oCKS0dd33pDZzbNNVgRPerG_UQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Can a child process detect postmaster death when in pg_usleep? (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Can a child process detect postmaster death when in pg_usleep?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 4:33 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 03:54:07PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > Thanks. You are right. The issue is due to the MyLatch being set by > > SwitchToSharedLatch before WaitLatch. If we use (WL_TIMEOUT | > > WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH), then the backends will honour the > > post_auth_delay as well as detect the postmaster death. Since we are > > not using WL_LATCH_SET, I removed ResetLatch. Also, added some > > comments around why we are not using WL_LATCH_SET. > > > > For PreAuthDelay, there's no problem to use WL_LATCH_SET as MyLatch > > still points to the local latch(which is not set) in > > BackendInitialize(). > > FWIW, I think that it could be a good idea to use the same set of > flags for all the pre/post_auth_delay paths for consistency. That's > useful when grepping for one. Please note that I don't plan to look > more at this patch set for this CF as I am not really excited by the > updates involving developer options, and I suspect more issues like > the one I found upthread so this needs a close lookup. > > If somebody else wishes to look at it, please feel free, of course. Thanks. Anyways, I removed WL_LATCH_SET for PreAuthDelay as well. PSA v4 patch. Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: