Re: shared-memory based stats collector

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com, tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, ah(at)cybertec(dot)at, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector
Date: 2020-09-03 17:16:59
Message-ID: 20200903171659.GO29590@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greetings,

* Kyotaro Horiguchi (horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> At Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:00:01 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> > Rebased on the current HEAD. 36ac359d36 conflicts with this. Tranche
>
> Hmm. This conflicts with 0fd2a79a63. Reabsed on it.

Thanks for working on this and keeping it updated!

I've started taking a look and at least right off...

> >From 4926e50e7635548f86dcd0d36cbf56d168a5d242 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyoga(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 17:15:35 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH v35 1/7] Use standard crash handler in archiver.
>
> The commit 8e19a82640 changed SIGQUIT handler of almost all processes
> not to run atexit callbacks for safety. Archiver process should behave
> the same way for the same reason. Exit status changes 1 to 2 but that
> doesn't make any behavioral change.

Shouldn't this:

a) be back-patched, as the other change was
b) also include a change to have the stats collector (which I realize is
removed later on in this patch set, but we're talking about fixing
existing things..) for the same reason, and because there isn't much
point in trying to write out the stats after we get a SIGQUIT, since
we're just going to blow them away again since we're going to go
through crash recovery..?

Might be good to have a separate thread to address these changes.

I've looked through (some of) this thread and through the patches also
and hope to provide a review of the bits that should be targetting v14
(unlike the above) soon.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kasahara Tatsuhito 2020-09-03 17:18:15 Re: Get memory contexts of an arbitrary backend process
Previous Message Geoff Winkless 2020-09-03 16:56:31 Re: INSERT ON CONFLICT and RETURNING