Re: [PG19] A canceled notify read leaves the NOTIFY queue stuck

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, joel(at)compiler(dot)org, arseniy(dot)mukhin(dot)dev(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: [PG19] A canceled notify read leaves the NOTIFY queue stuck
Date: 2026-10-22 16:34:35
Message-ID: 2476318.1792686875@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Playing around with this example, it avoids the queue-filling problem,
> but there's still an undesirable aspect: the N process has sent the L
> process a NOTIFY, but the L process does not see that, at least not
> till another NOTIFY is sent (and then it reports both at once).
> That's because the L process already cleared notifyInterruptPending,
> so it won't re-enter ProcessIncomingNotify. This is measurably worse
> than pre-v19: before, L would get the notify message when it next did
> something, even without another NOTIFY. (I'm not immediately sure
> why that changed.)

Oh, I must have fat-fingered the test case somehow, because when
I try this again, v18 behaves like HEAD. So never mind that bit.

I'm still interested in whether we can avoid blocking on a safe
snapshot, but that's clearly material for future development.
So we can close this open item for v19.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shihao zhong 2026-10-22 16:40:22 Re: [PG19] A canceled notify read leaves the NOTIFY queue stuck
Previous Message Greg Burd 2026-10-22 16:29:37 Re: Trying out <stdatomic.h>