Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start
Date
Msg-id 13085.1493077629@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start  (Rémi Zara <remi_zara@mac.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> What I'm inclined to do is to revert the pselect change but not the other,
> to see if that fixes these two animals.  If it does, we could look into
> blacklisting these particular platforms when choosing pselect.

It looks like coypu is going to need manual intervention (ie, kill -9
on the leftover postmaster) to get unwedged :-(.  That's particularly
disturbing because it implies that ServerLoop isn't iterating at all;
otherwise, it'd have noticed by now that the buildfarm script deleted
its data directory out from under it.  Even if NetBSD's pselect had
forgotten to unblock signals, you'd figure it'd time out after a
minute ... so it's even more broken than that.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] walsender & parallelism
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] OK, so culicidae is *still* broken