Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux
Date: 2020-09-09 20:50:26
Message-ID: 113530.1599684626@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Not only DNS, but all the various auth libraries would have to be
> contended with. Lots of work there compared to the likely rewards.

Wait a minute. The entire authentication cycle happens inside
InitPostgres, using the backend's normal signal handlers. So
maybe we are overthinking the problem. What if we simply postpone
ProcessStartupPacket into that same place, and run it under the same
rules as we do for authentication? We would waste more cycles than
we do now for the case where the client closes the connection without
sending a startup packet, but not enormously so, I think --- and
optimizing that case doesn't seem like a high-priority goal anyway.
And cases like DNS lookup taking forever don't seem like any more of
an issue than auth lookup taking forever.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonathan S. Katz 2020-09-09 20:57:11 Re: PG 13 release notes, first draft
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-09-09 20:30:37 Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux