Re: WIP csv logs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP csv logs
Date: 2007-06-06 23:26:32
Message-ID: 16891.1181172392@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> I wonder, if we were to use an LWLock to protect writing to the stderr
> pipe, would it be too contentious?

Sorry, that's a nonstarter.

1. Not all our processes are connected to shared memory. Even the ones
that are don't necessarily have PGPROCs.

2. If somebody crashes while holding the lock, the entire system
including the postmaster soon freezes up.

3. Having the postmaster take LWLocks is verboten anyway, mainly because
of problem #2.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-06-07 01:56:45 Re: BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-06-06 21:13:04 Re: WIP csv logs