Re: DSM segment handle generation in background workers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: DSM segment handle generation in background workers
Date
Msg-id 17043.1539046409@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DSM segment handle generation in background workers  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: DSM segment handle generation in background workers  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: DSM segment handle generation in background workers  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 1:17 AM Thomas Munro
> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> That's because the bgworker startup path doesn't contain a call to
>> srandom(...distinguishing stuff...), unlike BackendRun().  I suppose
>> do_start_bgworker() could gain a similar call... or perhaps that call
>> should be moved into InitPostmasterChild().  If we put it in there
>> right after MyStartTime is assigned a new value, we could use the same
>> incantation that PostmasterMain() uses.

> Maybe something like this?

I think the bit with

#ifndef HAVE_STRONG_RANDOM
     random_seed = 0;
     random_start_time.tv_usec = 0;
#endif

should also be done in every postmaster child, no?  If we want to hide the
postmaster's state from child processes, we ought to hide it from all.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Iwata, Aya"
Date:
Subject: RE: Function for listing archive_status directory
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: pread() and pwrite()