Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization
Date
Msg-id 200401090116.i091G4014784@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization  (Claudio Natoli <claudio.natoli@memetrics.com>)
Responses Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Claudio Natoli wrote:
>
> > BTW, how are we going to do cancels in Windows-land?  The sub-postmaster
> > isn't gonna have access to the postmaster's list of child PIDs and
> > cancel keys ...
>
> Good question (the Win32/EXEC_BACKEND case is #def'd out to issue an
> altogether unhelpful abort(), so I know it is there).
>
> The only things I've thought of so far are:
> a) sticking the PID/cancel key list in shared mem [yeech]
> b) rearranging the entire cancel handling to occur in the postmaster [double
> yeech]

As I remember, the only per-backend value to be passed is the cancel
key, and seeing that this is going to be a problem for postmaster too, I
think we need to move in the direction of a separate fork/exec-only
shared memory segment that holds the pids and cancel keys for all the
backends.

I will update the Win32 TODO list to mention this issue in more detail.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Claudio Natoli
Date:
Subject: Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: fork/exec patch: pre-CreateProcess finalization