Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control.
Date
Msg-id 20180308202653.hbfb3xfon4inb44j@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018-03-07 23:34:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > As I understand it, because we allow multiple Pg instances on a system, we
> > identify the small sysv shmem segment we use by the postmaster's pid. If
> > you remove the DirLockFile (postmaster.pid) you remove the interlock
> > against starting a new postmaster. It'll think it's a new independent
> > instance on the same host, make a new shmem segment and go merrily on its
> > way mangling data horribly.
> 
> Yeah.  If we realized that the old shmem segment was associated with this
> data directory, we could check for processes still attached to it ... but
> the lock file is exactly where that association is kept.

I'd somehow remembered that we just took the path as the identifier, but
that's wrong...

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE ofpartition key
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v11