| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The real reason why TAP testing isn't ready for prime time |
| Date: | 2015-06-19 19:19:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20150619191925.GQ133018@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > On 2015-06-19 13:56:21 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> We discussed this when that patch got in (82233ce7ea42d6b). The reason
> >> for not waiting, it was argued, is that the most likely reason for those
> >> processes not to have already gone away by the time we send SIGKILL was
> >> that they are stuck somewhere in the kernel, and so we might not be able
> >> to actually get them to go away with the SIGKILL. As I recall, that was
> >> the actual problem that MauMau was trying to get fixed.
>
> > How does exiting before they're dead help? They're still going to be
> > attached to shared memeory and thus prevent a restart. I don't think
> > hiding the problem by exiting the postmaster helps at all.
>
> My thought exactly.
I guess you have a point there.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2015-06-19 19:20:24 | Re: pgbench - allow backslash-continuations in custom scripts |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2015-06-19 19:17:19 | Re: pg_regress not waiting for postmaster to stop |