Re: Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures
Date: 2016-02-09 20:05:01
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> In any case, we should proceed with fixing things so that buildfarm owners
> can specify a higher shutdown timeout for especially slow critters.

I looked into doing this as I suggested yesterday, namely modifying the
buildfarm scripts, and soon decided that it would be a mess; there are
too many cases where "pg_ctl stop" is not invoked directly by the script.

I'm now in favor of applying the PGCTLTIMEOUT patch Noah proposed, and
*removing* the two existing hacks in that try to force -t 120.

The only real argument I can see against that approach is that we'd have
to back-patch the PGCTLTIMEOUT patch to all active branches if we want
to stop the buildfarm failures. We don't usually back-patch feature
additions. On the other hand, this wouldn't be the first time we've
back-patched something on grounds of helping the buildfarm, so I find
that argument pretty weak.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-09 20:05:14 Re: Multi-tenancy with RLS
Previous Message Joe Conway 2016-02-09 20:01:25 Re: Multi-tenancy with RLS