| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
| Date: | 2000-12-18 18:18:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20256.977163506@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com> writes:
> Any thoughts on a cleaner solution?
> One way to avoid this race condition is to set a timeout on the
> select. What is the maximum acceptable time for a timely response?
I thought about that, but it doesn't seem like a cleaner solution.
Basically you'd have to figure a tradeoff between wasted cycles in
the postmaster and time delay to respond to a crashed backend.
And there's no good tradeoff there. If you have a backend crash,
you want to shut down the other backends ASAP, before they have a
chance to propagate any shared-memory corruption that the failed
backend might've created. The entire exercise is probably pointless
if the postmaster twiddles its thumbs for awhile before killing the
other backends.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 18:40:19 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-12-18 18:03:34 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] 7.1 features list |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 18:40:19 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
| Previous Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 17:58:02 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |