Re: Signals in a BGW - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Signals in a BGW
Date
Msg-id 20171207195801.wugc5wcyarblwhp6@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Signals in a BGW  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Signals in a BGW  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017-12-07 12:35:07 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
> >> The default handler is bgworker_die ; see src/backend/postmaster
> >> /bgworker.c
> >> . I don't know if elog() is safe in a signal handler, but I guess in
> >> the absence of non-reentrant errcontext functions...
> >
> > That does seem bold, doesn't it?
> 
> Yes, I think it's flat busted.

We've had that discussion a couple times. The concensus so far has been
that FATALing is considered kinda ok, everything else not. But it
definitely has caused issues in the ast, mostly due to malloc being
entered while already in malloc.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Chapman Flack
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical replication without a Primary Key
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres with pthread