Re: possible bug not in open items - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: possible bug not in open items
Date
Msg-id 1239398941.6307.4.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: possible bug not in open items  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: possible bug not in open items  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 14:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> This patch is so wrong that it's scary.  You can't have
> ImmediateInterruptOK true over the duration of any significant amount of
> backend processing --- as an example, if you take control away in the
> middle of a malloc call, you'll probably be left with a corrupt malloc
> arena.
>

Thank you for the explanation. My initial thinking was that either
DoingCommandRead would protect us (for SIGINT to the backend), or we
were going to terminate the process anyway (for SIGTERM). But it sounds
like it leaves us in a state so unsafe that we can't even abort the
transaction nicely.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq 8.4 beta1: $PGHOST complains about missing root.crt
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: possible bug not in open items