| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <fujii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres_fdw uninterruptible during connection establishment / ProcSignalBarrier |
| Date: | 2023-01-10 02:05:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20230110020501.bujiesmhe2fuka42@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-01-03 12:05:20 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> The attached patch adds libpq-be-fe-helpers.h and uses it in libpqwalreceiver,
> dblink, postgres_fdw.
> As I made libpq-be-fe-helpers.h handle reserving external fds,
> libpqwalreceiver now does so. I briefly looked through its users without
> seeing cases of leaking in case of errors - which would already have been bad,
> since we'd already have leaked a libpq connection/socket.
>
>
> Given the lack of field complaints and the size of the required changes, I
> don't think we should backpatch this, even though it's pretty clearly buggy
> as-is.
Any comments on this? Otherwise I think I'll go with this approach.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-10 02:07:49 | Re: refactoring relation extension and BufferAlloc(), faster COPY |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-10 01:52:47 | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |