Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby
Date: 2017-03-31 06:47:21
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> I think you can call HandleStartupProcInterrupts() here, instead of checking postmaster death.

Oops, sorry for that, I quite mess up with this patch. The WaitLatch()
call should still have WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH so as it can leave earlier,
but yes I agree with your analysis that HandleStartupProcInterrupts()
as this is part of the redo work.

> Did Simon's committed patch solve the problem as expected?

Does not seem so, I'll let Simon comment on this matter...

Attachment Content-Type Size
standby-delay-latch-v6.patch application/octet-stream 4.1 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2017-03-31 06:50:28 Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-03-31 06:27:18 Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0