| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathan(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Teach DSM registry to ERROR if attaching to an uninitialized ent |
| Date: | 2025-11-22 19:41:21 |
| Message-ID: | aSIR4Z4U887f_KcQ@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 10:25:48AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 6:09 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Unpinning/detaching the segment/DSA/dshash table and deleting the DSM
>> registry entry in a PG_CATCH block scares me a little, but it might be
>> doable.
>
> It seems a bit weird to be doing explicit unpinning in a PG_CATCH
> block. Ideally you'd want to postpone the pinning until initialization
> has succeeded, so that if you fail before that, transaction cleanup
> takes care of it automatically. Alternatively, destroying what existed
> before could be deferred until later, when an as-yet-unfailed
> transaction stumbles across the tombstone.
Oh, yeah, good idea.
> Am I worrying too much? Possibly! But as I said to David on another
> thread this morning, it's better to worry on pgsql-hackers before any
> problem happens than to start worrying after something bad happens in
> a customer situation.
I'll give what you suggested a try. It seems reasonable enough.
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-11-23 00:44:33 | pgsql: Add SupportRequestInlineInFrom planner support request. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-11-22 17:02:17 | pgsql: tools: remove src/tools/codelines |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernice Southey | 2025-11-22 19:44:19 | Re: Add notification on BEGIN ATOMIC SQL functions using temp relations |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-11-22 19:00:05 | Re: [PATCH] Allow complex data for GUC extra. |