Re: BUG #17370: shmem lost on segfault
От | RekGRpth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17370: shmem lost on segfault |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPgh2mKshsFNZ4mKAYHtjntK9wtaevbJvTp6d0BU=-MbiYCT2w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #17370: shmem lost on segfault (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17370: shmem lost on segfault
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Ok, thanks. What I should do in this case (postmaster restarts my background worker and shared memory is lost)? When I storage in bgw_extra field - everything is ok (with restarting after segfault), but it size too small. ср, 19 янв. 2022 г. в 14:28, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 03:05:56AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote: > > The following bug has been logged on the website: > > > > Bug reference: 17370 > > Logged by: RekGRpth > > Email address: rekgrpth@gmail.com > > PostgreSQL version: 14.1 > > Operating system: docker alpine > > Description: > > > > In developing my https://github.com/RekGRpth/pg_task I found strange > > behavior of shared memory segment. > > This is not a postgres bug. If you need help with developing an extension you > should send a message to -hackers. > > That being said, in case of unclean shutdown (which happens if a process > segfaults), the postmaster will restart and any shared memory will be lost, so > I'm assuming that you somehow serialize a handle which isn't valid anymore > after a restart, unclean or not.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: