From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Postgresql Hackers Mailinglist <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: spoonbill vs. -HEAD |
Date: | 2013-05-07 08:09:39 |
Message-ID: | 5188B6C3.3090607@kaltenbrunner.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04/04/2013 02:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
>> On 04/03/2013 12:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> BTW, on further thought it seems like maybe this is an OpenBSD bug,
>>> at least in part: what is evidently happening is that the temporary
>>> blockage of SIGINT during the handler persists even after we've
>>> longjmp'd back to the main loop. But we're using sigsetjmp(..., 1)
>>> to establish that longjmp handler --- so why isn't the original signal
>>> mask reinstalled when we return to the main loop?
>>>
>>> If (your version of) OpenBSD is getting this wrong, it'd explain why
>>> we've not seen similar behavior elsewhere.
>
>> hmm trolling the openbsd cvs history brings up this:
>> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/sparc64/sparc64/machdep.c?r1=1.143;sortby=date#rev1.143
>
> That's about alternate signal stacks, which we're not using.
>
> I put together a simple test program (attached) and tried it on
> spoonbill, and it says that the signal *does* get unblocked when control
> returns to the sigsetjmp(...,1). So now I'm really confused. Somehow
> the results we're getting in a full-fledged backend do not match up with
> the results gotten by this test program ... but why?
as a followup to this - I spend some time upgrading spoonbill to the
lastest OpenBSD release (5.3) the other day and it seems to be able to
pass a full regression test run now on a manual run. I will add it to
the regular reporting schedule again, but it seems at least part of the
problem is/was an Operating system level issue that got fixed in either
5.2 or 5.3 (spoonbill was on 5.1 before).
Stefan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2013-05-07 08:17:51 | Re: In progress INSERT wrecks plans on table |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-05-07 07:33:36 | Re: In progress INSERT wrecks plans on table |