| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Issue with cancel_before_shmem_exit while searching to remove a particular registered exit callbacks |
| Date: | 2020-09-07 07:40:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20200907074057.GG4867@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:10:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> That split dates to the parallel query work, and there are some
> comments in shmem_exit() about it; see in particular the explanation
> in the middle where it says "Call dynamic shared memory callbacks." It
> seemed to me that I needed the re-entrancy behavior that is described
> there, but for a set of callbacks that needed to run before some of
> the existing callbacks and after others.
We still have a CF entry here:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/2649/
Is there still something that needs to absolutely be done here knowing
that we have bab1500 that got rid of the root issue? Can the CF entry
be marked as committed?
(FWIW, I would move any discussion about improving more stuff related
to shared memory cleanup code at proc exit into a new thread, as that
looks like a new topic.)
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2020-09-07 07:47:59 | Re: Optimising compactify_tuples() |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2020-09-07 07:38:30 | Re: Online checksums verification in the backend |