| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: REL_11_STABLE: dsm.c - cannot unpin a segment that is not pinned |
| Date: | 2019-02-17 22:36:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20190217223637.GF28750@telsasoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:26:53AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Huh. What exactly do you mean by "killing the postmaster"? If you
> mean SIGKILL or something, one problem with 11 is that
> gather_readnext() doesn't respond to postmaster death. I fixed that
> (and every similar place) in master with commit cfdf4dc4fc9, like so:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:26:12AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Yeah. I suppose we should probably consider back-patching a fix for that.
It hasn't been an issue for us, but that seems like a restart hazard. Who
knows what all the distros initscripts do, how thin a layer they are around
pg_ctl or kill, but you risk waiting indefinitely for postmaster and its gather
backend/s to die, all the while rejecting new clients with 'the database system
is shutting down'.
+1
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-02-17 22:41:10 | Re: CPU costs of random_zipfian in pgbench |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-17 22:31:43 | Re: BUG #15572: Misleading message reported by "Drop function operation" on DB with functions having same name |