| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Markus Wanner <markus(dot)wanner(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] ProcessInterrupts_hook |
| Date: | 2021-03-19 19:43:09 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYY=NDWChn9adKSb7hZmFmQQSoEzJy_9W36sJ+=CWghJA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 3:25 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> writes:
> > On 1/19/21 1:42 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >> My suggestion, which I'm happy to post in patch form if you think it's
> >> reasonable <snip>
>
> > Tom, Robert, and thoughts on the proposals in [1]?
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAGRY4nyNfscmQiZBCNT7cBYnQxJLAAVCGz%2BGZAQDAco1Fbb01w%40mail.gmail.com
>
> No objection to generalizing the state passed through pmsignal.c.
>
> I'm not very comfortable about the idea of having the postmaster set
> child processes' latches ... that doesn't sound terribly safe from the
> standpoint of not allowing the postmaster to mess with shared memory
> state that could cause it to block or crash. If we already do that
> elsewhere, then OK, but I don't think we do.
It should be unnecessary anyway. We changed it a while back to make
any SIGUSR1 set the latch ....
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-03-19 19:44:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-03-19 19:37:04 | Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch |