Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.
Date: 2017-12-14 18:52:31
Message-ID: CAHGQGwEj8sxpNs6iwvxz+qPAo+dDUU8vkGg+=JAfGGqoJeEL4g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:13 AM, Michael Paquier
>>> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> I would just write "To
>>>> avoid calling CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS which can happen when releasing a
>>>> LWLock" and be done with it. There is no point to list a full function
>>>> dependency list, which could change in the future with static routines
>>>> of lwlock.c.
>>
>> Agreed. Updated the comment.
>
> Robert actually liked adding the complete routine list. Let's see what
> Fujii-san thinks at the end, there is still some time until the next
> round of minor releases.

What I think is the patch I attached. Thought?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

Attachment Content-Type Size
fix_do_pg_abort_backup_v12_fujii.patch application/octet-stream 5.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2017-12-14 18:53:42 Re: procedures and plpgsql PERFORM
Previous Message Andreas Seltenreich 2017-12-14 18:47:08 Re: PostgreSQL crashes with SIGSEGV