From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
Date: | 2010-09-03 15:43:50 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimEm8Ysvqz3ph-fgLiXbLRDQ=ioFYm5yrLSVSFX@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> elog(FATAL) is *certainly* not a better idea. I think there's really
>>> nothing that can be done, you just have to silently ignore the error.
>
>> Hmm.. some functions called by a signal handler use elog(FATAL), e.g.,
>> RecoveryConflictInterrupt() do that when unknown conflict mode is given
>> as an argument. Are these calls unsafe, too?
>
> [ shrug... ] I stated before that the Hot Standby patch is doing
> utterly unsafe things in signal handlers. Simon rejected that.
> I am waiting for irrefutable evidence to emerge from the field
> (and am very confident that it will be forthcoming...) before
> I argue with him further. Meanwhile, I'm not going to accept anything
> unsafe in a core facility like this patch is going to be.
Oh. I thought you had ignored his objections and fixed it. Why are
we releasing 9.0 with this problem again? Surely this is nuts.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-03 15:47:45 | Re: Streaming a base backup from master |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-03 15:41:32 | Re: Streaming a base backup from master |