Re: global barrier & atomics in signal handlers (Re: Atomic operations within spinlocks)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: global barrier & atomics in signal handlers (Re: Atomic operations within spinlocks)
Date: 2020-06-10 17:37:59
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYGXPAKkqfBRQ1O9yEi+B-CMwqGe1kbDQOjMxp72xZ1Mw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> What do you think about my idea of having a BEGIN/END_SIGNAL_HANDLER?
> That'd make it much easier to write assertions forbidding palloc, 64bit
> atomics, ...

I must have missed the previous place where you suggested this, but I
think it's a good idea.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2020-06-10 17:39:08 Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-06-10 17:37:07 Re: Fast DSM segments