| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: latch usage and postmaster death |
| Date: | 2016-03-21 12:33:20 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZTXi9xC187vKRWEhCYPJAYirbqYmJBTCsQLNB+b2FDiQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> a significant number of WaitLatch's in the backend currently don't check
> for postmaster death. That's imo wrong. E.g. SELECT pg_sleep(100); just
> continues to run.
>
> I think we should change most sites to error out in that case. I wonder
> if we shouldn't add another WL_ flag that automatically makes the latch
> code do so; instead of repeating the code at every callsite.
Yeah, or just make it do it always. And probably FATAL rather than ERROR.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2016-03-21 12:44:29 | Re: Applying logical replication changes by more than one process |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-21 12:29:37 | Re: Parallel Aggregate |