| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Race conditions during parallel worker (unclean) exit |
| Date: | 2026-09-09 21:38:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAN12+YJWWfhRZT7MdpD178=kARuXufeDAGheELa=VY8nJqs=yw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > It seems cleaner to introduce a separate message for this case, maybe
> > "PqMsg_ParallelAborted", and keep the existing
> > "ERROR: lost connection to parallel worker" message.
>
> I'm not sure this is worth adjusting the FE/BE protocol. I'd prefer regular
> ERROR message (PqMsg_ErrorResponse), but only in some minimalistic form. The
> worker would only send the message, w/o doing any error handling itself.
Perhaps PqMsg_ErrorResponse could work, although I am not clear what a
minimalistic
form means here. I was thinking of PqMsg_ParallelAborted because we
have precedent
already with PqMsg_Progress which was introduced in f1889729dd3a as
the 'P' message
for parallel index progress reported, but later converted to a macro
in a99cc6c6b4b.
(I think it was wrong to name it PqMsg_Progress, but that's besides
the point here).
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Service (AWS)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2026-09-09 21:31:04 | Re: Add pg_nodiscard decorations to Bitmapset functions |