Re: PostmasterContext survives into parallel workers!?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostmasterContext survives into parallel workers!?
Date: 2016-08-01 22:18:27
Message-ID: 18843.1470089907@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> (Also vaguely on the list of things to clean up: can't we make it so
> that bgworkers aren't launched from inside a signal handler? Blech.)

So are other postmaster children, I believe. We could probably try
to rewrite the postmaster to not do useful work in signal handlers,
but rely on a lot of volatile flags set by the handlers. Not convinced
this would be anything but a cosmetic improvement, though. And it
could create new portability problems to replace any that it removed;
we'd have to be *absolutely* certain that the main select() call would
return with EINTR rather than resuming after any interrupt.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-08-01 22:18:29 Re: PostmasterContext survives into parallel workers!?
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-08-01 22:18:22 Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)